U.S. senators reintroduce bill to make daylight saving time permanent(fox8.com)
fox8.com
U.S. senators reintroduce bill to make daylight saving time permanent
https://fox8.com/news/u-s-senators-reintroduce-bill-to-make-daylight-saving-time-permanent/
414 comments
I’ve always found it hilarious that we consider the 5PM end of work day so fundamental, constant and unchangeable that changing every clock in the country twice a year is easier to do.
It's not a global constant. Across Central and Eastern Europe it's quite common to work 7am-3pm. You have half the afternoon in the sun at any time of year to enjoy. In winter it's a bleak commute to work though.
I mean, in a way, you are changing the end of the work day (the work day will end a hour earlier in the previous time zone at one shift, and one hour later in the previous time zone at the other shift), it's just that the time zone shift is the mechanism we use to do it.
If we use the approach of having the workday end at 5 PM during one half of the year, and 6 PM in the other half, people have to ask themselves "Are we in the 5 PM half, or the 6 PM half?" This confusion will probably last for a few weeks, similar to the confusion when a year changes (I write the old year for at least a month).
On the hand, changing the clocks is a one time change, and then you don't need to constantly check which half you're in.
If we use the approach of having the workday end at 5 PM during one half of the year, and 6 PM in the other half, people have to ask themselves "Are we in the 5 PM half, or the 6 PM half?" This confusion will probably last for a few weeks, similar to the confusion when a year changes (I write the old year for at least a month).
On the hand, changing the clocks is a one time change, and then you don't need to constantly check which half you're in.
winter is 6 summer is 5. if you have to think about it it means you are oblivious to which season you are in.
Presumably, there would be specific date that this change will happen. But the seasons don't change instantly from summer to winter on a specific dat, they gradually change over a few weeks, where the confusion I talk about will still occur.
Or in Hawaii
Or have the company just define and post business hours that work for them, like all retail companies do.
Or arizona
Also I know Colorado is mountain and it's always either -6 or -7 but on any given day I have to look up which it is. It's not a reflection of my intelligence.
Also I know Colorado is mountain and it's always either -6 or -7 but on any given day I have to look up which it is. It's not a reflection of my intelligence.
If you are in Hawaii you are near enough the equator that the day length changes is negligable anyway so having a offset is pointless.
It's also somewhat problematic: the above poster made a lot of assumptions about work day, but they're less and less true. Empty nesters, people without kids yet, childfree folks, all that rules out the school schedule (looking at the size of the school in my town, it's a small minority of people who have school aged childrens).
Then the 9-5 work day. Tradefolks often start much earlier. People working late shifts at restaurants and other service industries are very unlikely to do simple 9-5. People in tech are all over the place. "Early bird gets the worm" because if you're not at the default or earlier, you're basically fucked: hope you didn't need to sleep 7+ hours after that night shift, because you certainly aren't going to when the neighbors let the dog out to bark!
Then the 9-5 work day. Tradefolks often start much earlier. People working late shifts at restaurants and other service industries are very unlikely to do simple 9-5. People in tech are all over the place. "Early bird gets the worm" because if you're not at the default or earlier, you're basically fucked: hope you didn't need to sleep 7+ hours after that night shift, because you certainly aren't going to when the neighbors let the dog out to bark!
What interests me the most about this is that the times people use for work and school are set while the way we relate time to the cycle of the sun is the thing we want to change.
I've thought the same thing about temperature. In many places where the temperature and weather are unbearable during the day, the nights are beautifully comfortable. Alas, everything is closed. It would be amazing if "open hours" could shift with the weather, keeping people inside when it was bad and outside when it was nice, and if humans didnt need a 24h sleep schedule.
It’s probably easier to change behavior that’s arbitrarily done twice a year (changing clocks) than to change institutions (schools, corporations)
Benefits are highly regional. Where I live, the current latest sunrise is 8:06 am on December 5. I can't imagine a sunrise after 9am being very fun.
Agreed. I bet a lot of places would simply switch timezones if DST was removed.
And some places should actually just be in different timezones.
In Boston the latest sunrise is at 7:15am on Jan 2nd. However, the earliest sunset is at 4:11pm on December 6th.
If it were 8:15am to 5:11pm at the worst on either end, I know I at least would be less irritable.
In Boston the latest sunrise is at 7:15am on Jan 2nd. However, the earliest sunset is at 4:11pm on December 6th.
If it were 8:15am to 5:11pm at the worst on either end, I know I at least would be less irritable.
I grew up with my shortest "daylight day" starting at about 08:40 and finishing at about 14:50. This basically meant that both morning and evening commute happened in basically darkness. No matter of time-shifting would've accomplished "get both ends of the school/work-day in daylight", although making them shorter would've worked.
My state of Georgia has been trying this a few times and acknowledge that even if the state passes it the Federal Government says that it is illegal to do so, though 13 states have done so.
It certainly would also benefit our and other IT support staff as it never ceases to amaze me how many modern day applications trip up when the time changes
It certainly would also benefit our and other IT support staff as it never ceases to amaze me how many modern day applications trip up when the time changes
Another added benefit is getting sunshine/vitamin D during these 'newly found' daylight hours. This will lead to people not having as severe colds/flu symptoms, and more time being outside which leads to better general health altogether. I really hope this passes.
"Except during the summer months, the skin makes little if any vitamin D from the sun at latitudes above 37 degrees north (in the United States, the shaded region in the map) or below 37 degrees south of the equator. People who live in these areas are at relatively greater risk for vitamin D deficiency."
https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/time-for-more...
That roughly corresponds to San Fransisco on the west coast and Richmond, VA on the east coast. So, the impact will probably be minimal for many people.
That roughly corresponds to San Fransisco on the west coast and Richmond, VA on the east coast. So, the impact will probably be minimal for many people.
This would be such a boon for skiing in the Northeast. At some ski areas, the sun doesn’t strike the ground until 10am (because mountains cast shadows). It would be brighter during the best skiing of the day. Also, by 4p the Apres Ski scene is well underway, so the setting sun would probably help that along further.
This would benefit all the USA quite a bit. I like my sunlight after I get off from work. It's a huge quality of life improvement to get another hour of sunlight. In the morning most people don't care about that since they're headed to work anyway. I suppose it might affect morning joggers and other like that but ask yourself if the early bird should always get the worm?
It's the opposite problem where I live. With DST the sun does not rise until 8 AM.
In fact, in January, the sun rises here at 7:40 AM Standard Time. Which would be 8:40 AM Daylight Time.
It would be terrible to have to wake up an hour before sunrise.
In fact, in January, the sun rises here at 7:40 AM Standard Time. Which would be 8:40 AM Daylight Time.
It would be terrible to have to wake up an hour before sunrise.
and it would absolutely F the state of Indiana. We'd have to switch time zones.
Yeah, but Indiana is a good case study for why daylight savings time isn’t very effective. Didn’t they end up using more energy after switching to DST? I mean, they really changed because the show The West Wing had an entire episode about it, and nominally it was to keep in better sync with the East Coast. But they were able to measure actual energy changes as opposed to the theoretical benefits that are normally cited for DST.
(I lived in Indiana at the time they switched to observing DST, but I was on team central time zone)
(I lived in Indiana at the time they switched to observing DST, but I was on team central time zone)
Would that mean Indiana goes back to the way they were before they started doing Daylight Savings Time?
Why would switching time zones F you? Your neighbors are in Central time, what's keeping you in Eastern?
I should have used more words to express my opinion. I completely support Indiana and Michigan switching to central time. Part of Indiana is already CST because it's basically an extension of Chicago. I assume the rest of Indiana is EST as a relic of railroad scheduling and our proximity to Detroit.
We're going to spring forward and, where I live, it'll be daytime until 10pm. It'd be nice if Indiana just went ahead and committed to CST. I can't imagine what it's like living on the upper peninsula of Michigan and still being EST.
We're going to spring forward and, where I live, it'll be daytime until 10pm. It'd be nice if Indiana just went ahead and committed to CST. I can't imagine what it's like living on the upper peninsula of Michigan and still being EST.
wow, username checks out
The first few articles I could find on this topic neglected to identify the senators co-sponsoring the bill. Here's a list from boston.cbslocal.com:
* Roy Blunt (R-MO)
* Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS)
* James Lankford (R-OK)
* Ed Markey (D-MA)
* Marco Rubio (R-FL)
* Rick Scott (R-FL)
* Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)
* Ron Wyden (D-OR)
Wikipedia has some history on similar, short-lived efforts in the past:
> Seasonal observation of DST was first enacted in the US during World Wars I and II, as an attempt conserve fuel. The practice was unpopular and promptly repealed after each war; however, lobbyists from the petroleum industry lobbied to restore DST, as they had noticed it actually increased fuel consumption.
> Permanent DST in the US was briefly enacted by President Nixon in 1974, in response to the 1973 oil crisis. The proposal was initially supported by an estimated 79% of the public; that support dropped to 42% after its first winter, owing to the harshness of dark winter mornings that permanent DST creates. An estimated six school children were also killed by motorists due to the new law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_time_observation_in_...
On the eastern edge of the enormous Eastern time zone, I'm sympathetic to permanent DST, but I'm not sure it's a good idea nationwide. I would probably be in favor of the proposed Atlantic time zone, though.
* Roy Blunt (R-MO)
* Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS)
* James Lankford (R-OK)
* Ed Markey (D-MA)
* Marco Rubio (R-FL)
* Rick Scott (R-FL)
* Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)
* Ron Wyden (D-OR)
Wikipedia has some history on similar, short-lived efforts in the past:
> Seasonal observation of DST was first enacted in the US during World Wars I and II, as an attempt conserve fuel. The practice was unpopular and promptly repealed after each war; however, lobbyists from the petroleum industry lobbied to restore DST, as they had noticed it actually increased fuel consumption.
> Permanent DST in the US was briefly enacted by President Nixon in 1974, in response to the 1973 oil crisis. The proposal was initially supported by an estimated 79% of the public; that support dropped to 42% after its first winter, owing to the harshness of dark winter mornings that permanent DST creates. An estimated six school children were also killed by motorists due to the new law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_time_observation_in_...
On the eastern edge of the enormous Eastern time zone, I'm sympathetic to permanent DST, but I'm not sure it's a good idea nationwide. I would probably be in favor of the proposed Atlantic time zone, though.
As a Floridian, I am suspicious of anything co-sponsored by Rubio and Scott and look forward to reading how they and the rest of our fine state’s Congressional clown car profited from this bill.
Wow that's a huge shift in public support after the experience of a single winter. I wonder if we're doomed to repeat it.
I suspect if this were to go into effect, that yes, after the first winter on year-round DST, public opinion about the shift will change dramatically in a negative direction.
No one has yet experienced DST in the winter, owing to the present practice of shifting to standard time over the winter months. The change in morning daylight in the winter months will be a big shocker if this is adopted.
No one has yet experienced DST in the winter, owing to the present practice of shifting to standard time over the winter months. The change in morning daylight in the winter months will be a big shocker if this is adopted.
You're probably right. People at moderate latitudes--say 35+ degrees--mostly love their long summer evenings and they have tons of light in the morning anyway. And many may think they're fine with their cold dark winter mornings being a bit colder and darker in exchange for not having a time shift (and more light, such as it is, on the other end). But they actually aren't.
Considering how dark it is in winter mornings, I'd rather us just keep year-round off of DST instead. I say this while living in the geographic center of the country, and certainly for some people who live further north, I'd doubt they'd want the colder and darker mornings.
Govtrack is a fantastic resource for things like this:
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/s623
Thank you for mentioning this resource. I just found their cartogram map of House votes which provides a rather fascinating district-based map of the US, colored by vote.
For instance, the cartogram map of the recently passed "American Rescue Plan" relief act: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/117-2021/h72
For instance, the cartogram map of the recently passed "American Rescue Plan" relief act: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/117-2021/h72
So tragic that children had to die rather than just changing school start times a little later during the winter. People were so ridiculously dogmatic about starting at a particular number that lives were lost. Insane.
DST has become my favorite "holiday" as an adult. Seasonal depression evaporates when I can see the sun after I finish working for the day. I can go work in my yard, or wash my car after work instead of having to cram it in the middle of the day. I feel more motivated to go do other things in the evening instead of feeling like its time for bed at 5pm.
The same could be achieved by having different work hours in different seasons, no need to change the underlying metric of time to achieve this.
It's as if we redefined the density of water in winter so when you measure a frozen container of it the different volume yields the same weight.
It might have made sense when there was a single clock in a whole village!
But now with the planet probably containing 10x as many clocks as humans this is just complete lunacy.
It's as if we redefined the density of water in winter so when you measure a frozen container of it the different volume yields the same weight.
It might have made sense when there was a single clock in a whole village!
But now with the planet probably containing 10x as many clocks as humans this is just complete lunacy.
> The same could be achieved by having different work hours in different seasons, no need to change the underlying metric of time to achieve this.
Sure, but that’s just like saying that any two people could arrange things to do something at the same time and place by communicating a precise astronomical phenomenon at that place, like the azimuth of the Sun, then both people can work out when that will be relative to their personal schedules.
Of course, the point of widely-used regional standards for timekeeping is simply to avoid the need to communicate and calculate precise phenomena to represent a local time.
Sure, but that’s just like saying that any two people could arrange things to do something at the same time and place by communicating a precise astronomical phenomenon at that place, like the azimuth of the Sun, then both people can work out when that will be relative to their personal schedules.
Of course, the point of widely-used regional standards for timekeeping is simply to avoid the need to communicate and calculate precise phenomena to represent a local time.
Honestly, you're absolutely right. But we don't get to decide between a permanent DST and a unified switchover of business hours across the nation, we get to decide between a permanent DST and the crappy situation we have now. I, for one, would be measurably happier if I had more daytime after 5, because getting one bill passed is a whole lot easier than convincing every single scheduling body that has power over me to switch on a seasonal basis.
>The same could be achieved by having different work hours in different seasons, no need to change the underlying metric of time to achieve this.
This is a mere pipe dream. Business aren't going to change their hours to different seasons. It would be much easier to just stay on DST then try and coerce business to change their employee hours based off the season.
This is a mere pipe dream. Business aren't going to change their hours to different seasons. It would be much easier to just stay on DST then try and coerce business to change their employee hours based off the season.
Why are business hours so unchangeable? People seem to just take this as a given, like the God Of Business carved 9-5 on a stone tablet.
Imagine the most uncooperative, petty boss/manager you've ever worked for. Imagine trying to convince them to change business hours. Multiply by tens of thousands.
Businesses interact with other businesses and government agencies. Workers interact with schools and transit. It's about coordination not specific numbers.
The shock to our circadian rhythm, which would occur equally regardless of whether due to seasonal DST or due to seasonal 1-hour modifications to business hours, is responsible for loss of productivity/profitability/etc.
But businesses can elect to smear their seasonal modifications with any granularity they want, avoiding severe shock to circadian rhythm, thus avoiding the financial hit!
I guess DST could theoretically smear as well, but that is way more difficult for people to wrap their heads around.
But businesses can elect to smear their seasonal modifications with any granularity they want, avoiding severe shock to circadian rhythm, thus avoiding the financial hit!
I guess DST could theoretically smear as well, but that is way more difficult for people to wrap their heads around.
Not to mention that business hours are already not all the same. I’m not sure how so many people are missing that extremely obvious fact.
The Sun is the original clock. It used to be that “noon” in any given town was when the Sun was directly overhead, so redefining our fake time to give humans more sunlight doesn’t feel weird to me at all. We only invented time zones so our trains would stop running into each other lol
> It's as if we redefined the density of water in winter so when you measure a frozen container of it the different volume yields the same weight.
Oddly, this is exactly how the US "bushel" was defined -- it measures a mass of a specific type of grain at a particular moisture content, the idea being that the "quantity" of grain shouldn't change as it is dried.
Oddly, this is exactly how the US "bushel" was defined -- it measures a mass of a specific type of grain at a particular moisture content, the idea being that the "quantity" of grain shouldn't change as it is dried.
The density of water is also temperature-dependent :)
My point is that the chain of determining the measurement of a natural value should start at the value, not at what we want it to be to then bend the value over backwards to be that then.
So the example doesn't fall apart with a temperature-/moisture-dependent constant:
The point is that the constant should not be arbitrarily changed to achieve a desired value. The constant should be measured/defined and stay as such.
My point is that the chain of determining the measurement of a natural value should start at the value, not at what we want it to be to then bend the value over backwards to be that then.
So the example doesn't fall apart with a temperature-/moisture-dependent constant:
The point is that the constant should not be arbitrarily changed to achieve a desired value. The constant should be measured/defined and stay as such.
Lol. So I'm not the only one!
I tell people, Daylight Savings in March is my favorite day of the year.
I hate that in the part of year we need daylight the most we give up more daylight?!?!?
We now have electricity and few of us need to milk cows or plow fields.
The 8-5 for us is stationary.
It is never enjoyable to leave the inside of a building (factory or office) in darkness. Unless you just finished the night shift, I guess ..
I'll let the politicians decide what they want to do, but I know I'll never fully understand why we take away evening sunlight with our stationary 8-5.
I tell people, Daylight Savings in March is my favorite day of the year.
I hate that in the part of year we need daylight the most we give up more daylight?!?!?
We now have electricity and few of us need to milk cows or plow fields.
The 8-5 for us is stationary.
It is never enjoyable to leave the inside of a building (factory or office) in darkness. Unless you just finished the night shift, I guess ..
I'll let the politicians decide what they want to do, but I know I'll never fully understand why we take away evening sunlight with our stationary 8-5.
I grew up around farms and farmers. I never understood how DST was supposed to benefit them. The farm animals can't read a clock, they just follow their circadian rhythms and the farmers follow suit.
It did not. That was a marketing excuse that was fed to the city dwellers.
The farm animals do not understand the "time of day" on a human clock, so the farm work occurs around the animals rhythms, not the "clock on the wall". Moving the time of day backwards or forwards just changes what number is on the clock face when the cows are ready to be milked.
The farm animals do not understand the "time of day" on a human clock, so the farm work occurs around the animals rhythms, not the "clock on the wall". Moving the time of day backwards or forwards just changes what number is on the clock face when the cows are ready to be milked.
> Moving the time of day backwards or forwards just changes what number is on the clock face when the cows are ready to be milked.
Which changes whether the children are there to do the milking, or at school instead, right?
Which changes whether the children are there to do the milking, or at school instead, right?
From my experience, cows need to be milked pretty early in the morning (e.g. 5:00am for my friends); early enough that it will always be before school regardless.
No, the cows need to be milked on the cows schedule, and the cows don't know what human time it is when they need to be milked. Moving the clock does not make the cows change their schedule.
Right, as I said, the cows' schedule does not change based on what the clock says, but whether the children are there or at school does change.
I always assumed it was so the children could perform their unpaid farm labor before going to school, but that’s a guess based on no evidence whatsoever.
The switch to DST for me is something along the lines of: "I've been noticing how it's getting measurably lighter in the evenings and now it's really light."
(Of course, ST is the opposite effect.) I care less about light in the morning as I tend not to be a particular early bird and where I live it's pretty dark first thing in the morning even with ST.
(Of course, ST is the opposite effect.) I care less about light in the morning as I tend not to be a particular early bird and where I live it's pretty dark first thing in the morning even with ST.
Just wait until it's permanent and the sun doesn't rise until nearly 9 in the morning all winter. Not sure we can say how spending your whole morning in the dark will effect your SAD. Personally, sunlight greatly helps me wake up, and darkness helps me go to sleep.
DST drives me nuts. Just as spring morning light finally brightens the start of my day, it gets plunged back into darkness. Light persists into evening when dusk should be persuading all to bed.
And coding embedded systems to handle DST edge cases just gets obnoxious when unnecessary.
You want to shift your hours? Adjust your own schedule, don’t demand imposing a change that disrupts mine.
And coding embedded systems to handle DST edge cases just gets obnoxious when unnecessary.
You want to shift your hours? Adjust your own schedule, don’t demand imposing a change that disrupts mine.
I agree with this. DST also ruins the summer evenings, because you have to wait too long until the sky turns into that beautiful dark blue before getting entirely dark.
As someone who struggles with seasonal depression as well, but who also wakes up early and starts his day early, DST is my enemy for all of the reasons you love it. I'd prefer no DST.
I think we can't "win" with time-related legislation. Is this apple cart something our govt really needs to be upsetting right now?
I think we can't "win" with time-related legislation. Is this apple cart something our govt really needs to be upsetting right now?
Counterintuitively, I believe increased sunshine is more associated with depression and suicide than decreasing amounts of it. Suicides are higher in the spring and early summer than in the fall and winter. It's speculated that the increasing light may screw with sleep patterns more than decreasing amounts of light. Not claiming to understand it, but studies in multiple countries across the hemispheres seem to show the same pattern.
the way I've had this rationalized to me was two-fold:
- some people commit suicide when the change of seasons doesn't fix their depressive episode
- others were so lethargic that the added sunlight gives them the necessary evidence/cognitive fuel to plan and execute
I'm another in the camp of "Why not standard time?" It seems like a lot of experts agree Standard Time is more healthy. Plus two whole countries (admittedly in Europe) tried permanent DST and either stopped it or flipped to permanent Standard Time. So is this just an uninformed position we're pushing forward or is the US truly unique?
Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time
Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time
Could there be a compromise solution possible like, dunno, using Standard Time half of the year and Daylight Saving Time the other half?
Just kidding, of course. Yeah, I'm in the same camp. If you need to wake up earlier, tell people to wake up earlier, do not redefine time. What's next, redefining meter, because sticks shorter than one meter are more convenient to use? Businesses would probably lobby to redefine time, so we can work more, while nominally having 8-hour workdays.
Just kidding, of course. Yeah, I'm in the same camp. If you need to wake up earlier, tell people to wake up earlier, do not redefine time. What's next, redefining meter, because sticks shorter than one meter are more convenient to use? Businesses would probably lobby to redefine time, so we can work more, while nominally having 8-hour workdays.
"Tried it and flipped" is pretty weak. They had complaints. I'm sure there were complaints both ways. Maybe arguing that something is 'default' is easier. This evidence isn't really compelling in either direction.
In any case, we should just all switch to UTC. Software development and global trade would benefit.
In any case, we should just all switch to UTC. Software development and global trade would benefit.
At least france and spain are at DST or more the whole year (winter is DST and summer is DST++). I haven't heard people clamoring for moving out of winter DST (actually permanent DST++ is kinda popular since it's now part of the culture to have late leisure time)
Also, I'm based in Asia, and it would help me have more times for meetings with my US teammates without having to wake up super early :) Not looking forward to next week onward...
[deleted]
No, no, no. Just kill DST.
Noon should be about when the sun is highest in the sky, not 1pm.
Sunrise and sunset math is so much easier if solar noon happens around clock noon too, because sunrise and sunset are equally distant from noon. If the Sunset is around 7pm, then sunrise will be at (12-7) 5am.
It makes no sense at all to have solar noon shifted one hour for the entire country, especially because for most of the world, solar noon happens around noon, for obvious reasons.
Noon should be about when the sun is highest in the sky, not 1pm.
Sunrise and sunset math is so much easier if solar noon happens around clock noon too, because sunrise and sunset are equally distant from noon. If the Sunset is around 7pm, then sunrise will be at (12-7) 5am.
It makes no sense at all to have solar noon shifted one hour for the entire country, especially because for most of the world, solar noon happens around noon, for obvious reasons.
> Noon should be about when the sun is highest in the sky, not 1pm.
That's impossible to achieve across all latitudes and longitudes, and it's totally arbitrary and has zero benefit.
Solar noon matters to precisely nobody. No one is looking at the sky to tell time.
People want sunlight after work. They don't want to be depressed because they finish the day and it's dark outside.
This benefits restaurants, retail, and many industries that thrive on increased leisure activity.
That's impossible to achieve across all latitudes and longitudes, and it's totally arbitrary and has zero benefit.
Solar noon matters to precisely nobody. No one is looking at the sky to tell time.
People want sunlight after work. They don't want to be depressed because they finish the day and it's dark outside.
This benefits restaurants, retail, and many industries that thrive on increased leisure activity.
> That's impossible to achieve across all latitudes and longitudes, and it's totally arbitrary and has zero benefit.
> Solar noon matters to precisely nobody. No one is looking at the sky to tell time.
That's why the OP said "about when the sun is highest" not "exactly when the sun is highest". And it matters if you like the idea of midday being at, well, the middle of the day. Deliberately adding another ~4% error on top of whatever is there because of arbitrary time zone boundaries, and things begin to add up and eventually you end up like Spain.
> People want sunlight after work. They don't want to be depressed because they finish the day and it's dark outside.
To state the obvious, changing the clocks doesn't change the amount of daylight available. As another commenter said, if we've learned anything from the pandemic, maybe it's that we can be flexible about work hours instead of warping our sense of time and the rhythm of the day because managers and office workers can't fathom the idea of seasonal work hours.
> Solar noon matters to precisely nobody. No one is looking at the sky to tell time.
That's why the OP said "about when the sun is highest" not "exactly when the sun is highest". And it matters if you like the idea of midday being at, well, the middle of the day. Deliberately adding another ~4% error on top of whatever is there because of arbitrary time zone boundaries, and things begin to add up and eventually you end up like Spain.
> People want sunlight after work. They don't want to be depressed because they finish the day and it's dark outside.
To state the obvious, changing the clocks doesn't change the amount of daylight available. As another commenter said, if we've learned anything from the pandemic, maybe it's that we can be flexible about work hours instead of warping our sense of time and the rhythm of the day because managers and office workers can't fathom the idea of seasonal work hours.
I understand why some people want more light in the morning. I understand why some people want more light in the evening. I don't understand why anyone would care when solar noon is.
Because it's the traditional marker for midday. You said yourself that different people want light at different times of day, so trying to accommodate people's needs like that will always fail someone. Why not skew as close to traditional time as feasible, if all we need to do is agree on one standard?
You seem to assume people's preferences are monotonic and average to solar time. Most people want more light in the evening. And most people say light before or after work is better than neither.
My assumption is that individual people's preferences are an insignificantly small data point compared to thousands of years of solar-based time schemes that our ancestors seemed to get by just fine with.
Most of our ancestors didn't work fixed hours in artificial light.
I think you can ignore data from before electric lighting.
More people want it later.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/poll-74-percent-of-...
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/poll-74-percent-of-...
Did you know that DST is 2/3 of the year? If we're going to remove something, we should extend DST to 100%, not shrink it from 65% to 0%.
I don't see how more of a bad thing makes it good.
Your problem is with your time zone, not with DST.
DST is the time zone I have a problem with. ;)
You're not alone in seeing the madness but it looks like it's a losing battle. I think fundamentally people can't disconnect themselves from the clock on the wall. The day starts around 09:00 and ends around 17:00. You can only start work at 08:00 if the clock is set to 09:00 and you can only leave at 16:00 if the clock says 17:00. Apparently everyone believes that everyone else is too dumb to just get up an hour earlier, so they feel more comfortable into tricking everyone into doing it by setting their clocks for them. It's the only explanation I have. It really says a lot about how much faith everyone has in the rest of society.
...I still to this day wake up more reliably to sunlight than my alarm. I wish I could decouple from gigantic fusion ball time, but there's just something about that sudden uptick in sensible energy...
The crack of dawn is too...darn...loud!
The crack of dawn is too...darn...loud!
Still, I'll take all DST over switching twice a year.
Super nitpicky, but... sunrise and sunset are not equally distant from solar noon, because of the eccentricity of Earth's orbit around the Sun. Since the orbit is an ellipse, Kepler's law means that our orbital speed is constantly changing.
Most of Alaska is already an hour "further east" than it should be during standard time. This just makes it even worse. Mid day is between 1 and 2pm for much of the state during ST, and between 2pm and 3pm during DST.
Okay. I'm sold. Geometry AND an increase in vocabulary's ability to apply to the world. We're cross-disciplinary, and done here.
Everyone can move along.
Everyone can move along.
Up north, is it noon all day during summer? Or does noon move around a whole bunch?
I much prefer sleeping when it gets dark, and this fits in much better with our body's circadian rhythm. If doing things in the dark is such an issue, why not change business/school hours to work around that? Who decided that 9-5 is the optimal time to do business? Why should we disrupt our body's natural attunement to daylight just because our bosses won't let us leave until it's already dark? Why not look at "summer business hours" instead of "daylight time"?
All of that is correct, very smart, and impossible to implement from the top. At this point the idiotic way to do things is just too ingrained. All that can be done is play with DST a little.
Most od the year, if not whole year, there is dark long before going to sleep.
I'm just so, so thankful I don't maintain any kind of time zone libraries
https://gist.github.com/timvisee/fcda9bbdff88d45cc9061606b4b...
https://gist.github.com/timvisee/fcda9bbdff88d45cc9061606b4b...
Fair enough, I probably wouldn’t enjoy that work either! But it’s important to note that changes in the local timekeeping rules of various regions is precisely what the tz database is designed to handle. As far as I can tell, this rule change would be straightforward to enter into the tz database and to use for any software that’s already using the tz database.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tz_database
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tz_database
One thing that comes up every time this is discussed is that it has different impacts on people depending on their latitude. A solution that does not come up all that often is adding latitude-based time zones, and I'd be interested to read some thoughts on it from the HN community.
Edit: as this was ambiguous to at least one commenter, I'm not proposing replacing the current longitude-based time zones, but splitting them or shifting their boundaries based on latitude.
Edit: as this was ambiguous to at least one commenter, I'm not proposing replacing the current longitude-based time zones, but splitting them or shifting their boundaries based on latitude.
It seems like if you let small enough geographical areas decide their own time zones, this should happen naturally. For example I could imagine Scotland and England choosing different time zones because Scotland, which is further north, might be particularly interested in not having winter sunrises be too late.
When I moved to Oregon I was a little surprised at how long the evenings were in the summer time and commensurate shortening of the day in the winter, but it’s only about 20 minutes less light in the morning at the worst part of the year.
As a (former) programmer, the idea of changing to latitude based time zones in every current software package in existence gives me nightmares. But if you are looking for "Basic Jobs for Programmers" policymaking, it would do the trick.
So London, England would be in the same timezone as Moosenee, Canada and Irkutsk, Russia?
EDIT: This checkerboard would be very difficult to deal with. Also, people in northern or southern latitudes are used to extremes in day lengths.
But, fundamentally, timezones are so that "noon" is about when the sun is overhead for you. People at the same longitude still have the same noontime regardless of when the sun rises or sets.
EDIT: This checkerboard would be very difficult to deal with. Also, people in northern or southern latitudes are used to extremes in day lengths.
But, fundamentally, timezones are so that "noon" is about when the sun is overhead for you. People at the same longitude still have the same noontime regardless of when the sun rises or sets.
No, but Moosonee, Canada might be in a different time zone from Key West, FL (they are currently in the same time zone).
I think you're misunderstanding his proposal. He's not advocating for <<getting rid>> of longitudinal timezones, he's proposing <<adding>> latitudinal timezones.
Timezones now are kind of long lines from pole to pole, he wants them to be more like checkerboards. He does have a point, the same timezone that's ok at the Equator makes for kind of awkward periods of the day around the 50th meridian.
Timezones now are kind of long lines from pole to pole, he wants them to be more like checkerboards. He does have a point, the same timezone that's ok at the Equator makes for kind of awkward periods of the day around the 50th meridian.
Not the above poster, but I suspect they were referring to the fact that in higher latitudes day lengths are affected much more by seasonal swings than areas closer to the equator. So the reasons for having DST to begin with becomes more exaggerated at those latitudes.
I know, I live in Canada. I'm trying to figure out what they are proposing.
Not entirely sure what that exactly that would mean either.
At the very least let states choose to use daylight or standard time. Federal law allows states to permanently adopt standard time, but prohibits the year-round adoption of daylight time. Washington passed a law to adopt permanent daylight savings in 2019 but it was contingent on changes to Federal law.
I'm not familiar with the federal laws governing timezones but I've wondered if Washington could have adopted Mountain Standard Time, which is the same as Pacific Daylight Time, without Federal approval.
EDIT: seems Department of Transportation can assign timezone based on petition from state government.
https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/procedure-moving-...
I'm not familiar with the federal laws governing timezones but I've wondered if Washington could have adopted Mountain Standard Time, which is the same as Pacific Daylight Time, without Federal approval.
EDIT: seems Department of Transportation can assign timezone based on petition from state government.
https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/procedure-moving-...
Arizona does not change its clocks. It could therefore be considered to be on PDT or MST depending on the season.
https://www.timeanddate.com/time/zone/usa/arizona
> Most of Arizona observes Mountain Standard Time (MST) all year. However, because the Navajo Nation observes Daylight Saving Time (DST), the corresponding DST designation, Mountain Daylight Time (MDT) is also listed here.
> There is a common misconception that Arizona is on Pacific Daylight Time (PDT) during the summer and on Mountain Standard Time (MST) during the winter. Because MST and PDT have the same UTC offset of minus 7 hours (UTC-7), Arizona has the same local time as neighboring states California and Nevada during the summer season.
> Most of Arizona observes Mountain Standard Time (MST) all year. However, because the Navajo Nation observes Daylight Saving Time (DST), the corresponding DST designation, Mountain Daylight Time (MDT) is also listed here.
> There is a common misconception that Arizona is on Pacific Daylight Time (PDT) during the summer and on Mountain Standard Time (MST) during the winter. Because MST and PDT have the same UTC offset of minus 7 hours (UTC-7), Arizona has the same local time as neighboring states California and Nevada during the summer season.
What’s really fun is that the Hopi Nation, totally enclosed by the Navajo Nation, is the same as Arizona and doesn’t observe DST.
I don't see why the state should be able to force a timezone on the Navajo Nation. They're more of a state than Arizona is
> I don't see why the state should be able to force a timezone on the Navajo Nation.
Citation please; where is it written that any state is trying to force a timezone on the Navajo Nation?
> They're more of a state than Arizona is
Navajo Nation is not a state. At all. It is a nation. The territory of that nation is contained within the geographic footprint of three contiguous states (Arizona, Utah and Mexico).
Citation please; where is it written that any state is trying to force a timezone on the Navajo Nation?
> They're more of a state than Arizona is
Navajo Nation is not a state. At all. It is a nation. The territory of that nation is contained within the geographic footprint of three contiguous states (Arizona, Utah and Mexico).
The Navajo Nation, except the Hopi Reservation, doesn't follow Arizona they do follow DST.
I don't know if the Navajo Nation is subject to the federal law that requires observing DST or standard time.
I don't know if the Navajo Nation is subject to the federal law that requires observing DST or standard time.
I highly doubt if they are. States aren't why would a nation?
I find the idea crazy.
I get DST, I understand its benefits. But I think it only makes sense because it's not the norm. Because it's not the norm, we get used to the time for half the year, stick with our long-established timetables, and then want more evening sunlight in the summer.
Making it permanent means we are saying that even 100 years from now, children will ask "why isn't the sun at the top of the sky at noon?" and we'll say "a hundred years ago people thought it was easier to permanently change the clocks because businesses would never, ever let people go home at 4:00."
I think that, if the pandemic and a year from remote work and school has taught us anything, it's that getting people to stop work or school an hour earlier is actually within our grasp.
(Speaking of which, it's 4:00. I'm going to get off the computer now.)
I get DST, I understand its benefits. But I think it only makes sense because it's not the norm. Because it's not the norm, we get used to the time for half the year, stick with our long-established timetables, and then want more evening sunlight in the summer.
Making it permanent means we are saying that even 100 years from now, children will ask "why isn't the sun at the top of the sky at noon?" and we'll say "a hundred years ago people thought it was easier to permanently change the clocks because businesses would never, ever let people go home at 4:00."
I think that, if the pandemic and a year from remote work and school has taught us anything, it's that getting people to stop work or school an hour earlier is actually within our grasp.
(Speaking of which, it's 4:00. I'm going to get off the computer now.)
What tangible benefit does society gain from the sun being straight up at noon? Furthermore, how is this a valid argument when timezones are +/- an hour wide, meaning that even if local noon == noon in one part of the timezone, that is not true in other parts of the same timezone? This is the worst reasoning to base this decision on.
It helps with circadian rhythms. I seem to post this for every DST story, so I might as well continue the tradition:
The folks who study this:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronobiology
Seem to have come to a consensus that if we're going to get rid of DST, then health-wise it is best to have Standard Time year-round:
> As an international organization of scientists dedicated to studying circadian and other biological rhythms, the Society for Research on Biological Rhythms (SRBR) engaged experts in the field to write a Position Paper on the consequences of choosing to live on DST or Standard Time (ST). The authors take the position that, based on comparisons of large populations living in DST or ST or on western versus eastern edges of time zones, the advantages of permanent ST outweigh switching to DST annually or permanently.
* https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/07487304198541...
For a longer-read, referencing quite a bit of academic literature, but a conclusionary snippet:
> In summary, the scientific literature strongly argues against the switching between DST and Standard Time and even more so against adopting DST permanently. The latter would exaggerate all the effects described above /beyond/ the simple extension of DST from approximately 8 months/year to 12 months/year (depending on country) since /body clocks/ are generally even later during winter than during the long photoperiods of summer (with DST) (Kantermann et al., 2007; Hadlow et al., 2014, 2018; Hashizaki et al., 2018). Perennial DST increases SJL prevalence even more, as described above.
* https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019.0094...
Other position papers that I've dug up over the years when curiosity got the better of me:
> Society for Research on Biological Rhythms (SRBR) is dedicated to advancing rigorous, peer-reviewed science and evidence-based policies related to sleep and circadian biology.
* https://srbr.org/advocacy/daylight-saving-time-presskit/
* (refs, with pro and con): https://srbr.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/DST-References-S...
European Sleep Research Society:
* https://esrs.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/To_the_EU_Commiss...
American Academy of Sleep Medicine (with 36 footnotes if you want to dig further):
* https://jcsm.aasm.org/doi/10.5664/jcsm.8780
* https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.8780
The Centre for Chronobiology, based at the Psychiatric University Hospital (University of Basel):
* http://www.chronobiology.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/JBR-D...
* http://www.chronobiology.ch/
The folks who study this:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronobiology
Seem to have come to a consensus that if we're going to get rid of DST, then health-wise it is best to have Standard Time year-round:
> As an international organization of scientists dedicated to studying circadian and other biological rhythms, the Society for Research on Biological Rhythms (SRBR) engaged experts in the field to write a Position Paper on the consequences of choosing to live on DST or Standard Time (ST). The authors take the position that, based on comparisons of large populations living in DST or ST or on western versus eastern edges of time zones, the advantages of permanent ST outweigh switching to DST annually or permanently.
* https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/07487304198541...
For a longer-read, referencing quite a bit of academic literature, but a conclusionary snippet:
> In summary, the scientific literature strongly argues against the switching between DST and Standard Time and even more so against adopting DST permanently. The latter would exaggerate all the effects described above /beyond/ the simple extension of DST from approximately 8 months/year to 12 months/year (depending on country) since /body clocks/ are generally even later during winter than during the long photoperiods of summer (with DST) (Kantermann et al., 2007; Hadlow et al., 2014, 2018; Hashizaki et al., 2018). Perennial DST increases SJL prevalence even more, as described above.
* https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019.0094...
Other position papers that I've dug up over the years when curiosity got the better of me:
> Society for Research on Biological Rhythms (SRBR) is dedicated to advancing rigorous, peer-reviewed science and evidence-based policies related to sleep and circadian biology.
* https://srbr.org/advocacy/daylight-saving-time-presskit/
* (refs, with pro and con): https://srbr.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/DST-References-S...
European Sleep Research Society:
* https://esrs.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/To_the_EU_Commiss...
American Academy of Sleep Medicine (with 36 footnotes if you want to dig further):
* https://jcsm.aasm.org/doi/10.5664/jcsm.8780
* https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.8780
The Centre for Chronobiology, based at the Psychiatric University Hospital (University of Basel):
* http://www.chronobiology.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/JBR-D...
* http://www.chronobiology.ch/
The name of a particular hour has ZERO connection to that hour's use. You body doesn't know if an hour is called noon or 5:00. It only cares in relation to the position of the sun and the length of the daylight hours.
If people stay on DST and it turns out that starting the day an hour later is more beneficial, then life will simply gradually adjust.
If people stay on DST and it turns out that starting the day an hour later is more beneficial, then life will simply gradually adjust.
Tell that to the chronobiologists and sleep researchers and their peer-reviewed papers, I'm just the messenger.
You wake and sleep according to the artificial clock, but your body operates (chemically) on the amount of sun light that is available, and the discrepancy between the sun clock and the social clock, is where the health effects come in:
> For example, New York’s social clock closely matches the sun clock in winter during Standard Time: when the social clock says it is noon, it is very close to midday, the sun’s highest point in the sky. During DST, however, New York’s social clock shows noon when it is only 1100 h by the sun clock. People who have to get up at 0600 h by the sun clock in winter have to get up at 0500 h by the sun clock under DST, despite the social clock showing 0600 h. Essentially, they have to go to work in 1 time zone further to the east. This means that people in Chicago have to work during the office hours of New York, and people in Berlin have the office hours of St. Petersburg. Instead of seeing DST as working according to one time zone to the east, one can also think of it as people’s body clocks being pushed further west within their time zone (or social clock). Since the body clock follows the sun clock, these changes can affect our health.
* https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/07487304198541...
> An understanding of time zones is essential for appreciating the effects of DST because switching to DST is nothing else but assigning the respective location to one time zone further east. This switch increases the discrepancy between the sun clock and the social clock by 1 h. This means that for Galicia [Spain] during summer, it is only 9:30 am by the sun clock when social clock claims noon, since they now have to live according to the hour-meridian that runs roughly through St. Petersburg [Russia].
* https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019.0094...
> For example, New York’s social clock closely matches the sun clock in winter during Standard Time: when the social clock says it is noon, it is very close to midday, the sun’s highest point in the sky. During DST, however, New York’s social clock shows noon when it is only 1100 h by the sun clock. People who have to get up at 0600 h by the sun clock in winter have to get up at 0500 h by the sun clock under DST, despite the social clock showing 0600 h. Essentially, they have to go to work in 1 time zone further to the east. This means that people in Chicago have to work during the office hours of New York, and people in Berlin have the office hours of St. Petersburg. Instead of seeing DST as working according to one time zone to the east, one can also think of it as people’s body clocks being pushed further west within their time zone (or social clock). Since the body clock follows the sun clock, these changes can affect our health.
* https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/07487304198541...
> An understanding of time zones is essential for appreciating the effects of DST because switching to DST is nothing else but assigning the respective location to one time zone further east. This switch increases the discrepancy between the sun clock and the social clock by 1 h. This means that for Galicia [Spain] during summer, it is only 9:30 am by the sun clock when social clock claims noon, since they now have to live according to the hour-meridian that runs roughly through St. Petersburg [Russia].
* https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019.0094...
> It helps with circadian rhythms. I seem to post this for every DST story, so I might as well continue the tradition:
All these arguments against a timezone change, removing the shifting to/from DST, etc are predicated on the assumption that the times that schools, work places, restaurants, public amenities, etc open and close through the year are not allowed to change.
This seems to be a surreptitious strawman argument against TZ/DST changes, as there's no legal or regulatory reasons to prevent any of these institutions changing their hours of operation.
All these arguments against a timezone change, removing the shifting to/from DST, etc are predicated on the assumption that the times that schools, work places, restaurants, public amenities, etc open and close through the year are not allowed to change.
This seems to be a surreptitious strawman argument against TZ/DST changes, as there's no legal or regulatory reasons to prevent any of these institutions changing their hours of operation.
The assumption is most of them won't change their hours. Because most of them don't. With or without DST.
Which of those sources say solar noon matters more than light exposure just before or after sleep?
> An understanding of time zones is essential for appreciating the effects of DST because switching to DST is nothing else but assigning the respective location to one time zone further east. This switch increases the discrepancy between the sun clock and the social clock by 1 h. This means that for Galicia [Spain] during summer, it is only 9:30 am by the sun clock when social clock claims noon, since they now have to live according to the hour-meridian that runs roughly through St. Petersburg [Russia].
* https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019.0094...
> For example, New York’s social clock closely matches the sun clock in winter during Standard Time: when the social clock says it is noon, it is very close to midday, the sun’s highest point in the sky. During DST, however, New York’s social clock shows noon when it is only 1100 h by the sun clock. People who have to get up at 0600 h by the sun clock in winter have to get up at 0500 h by the sun clock under DST, despite the social clock showing 0600 h. Essentially, they have to go to work in 1 time zone further to the east. This means that people in Chicago have to work during the office hours of New York, and people in Berlin have the office hours of St. Petersburg. Instead of seeing DST as working according to one time zone to the east, one can also think of it as people’s body clocks being pushed further west within their time zone (or social clock). Since the body clock follows the sun clock, these changes can affect our health.
* https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/07487304198541...
* https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019.0094...
> For example, New York’s social clock closely matches the sun clock in winter during Standard Time: when the social clock says it is noon, it is very close to midday, the sun’s highest point in the sky. During DST, however, New York’s social clock shows noon when it is only 1100 h by the sun clock. People who have to get up at 0600 h by the sun clock in winter have to get up at 0500 h by the sun clock under DST, despite the social clock showing 0600 h. Essentially, they have to go to work in 1 time zone further to the east. This means that people in Chicago have to work during the office hours of New York, and people in Berlin have the office hours of St. Petersburg. Instead of seeing DST as working according to one time zone to the east, one can also think of it as people’s body clocks being pushed further west within their time zone (or social clock). Since the body clock follows the sun clock, these changes can affect our health.
* https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/07487304198541...
Those quotes just use social noon as an example. They don't say circadian rhythms are especially sensitive to solar noon.
Or you could simply read the article. Ctrl-F "circ" is handy:
> Although DST has always been a political issue, we need to discuss the biology associated with these decisions because the circadian clock plays a crucial role in how the outcome of these discussions potentially impacts our health and performance. Here, we give the necessary background to understand how the circadian clock, the social clock, the sun clock, time zones, and DST interact.
* https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019.0094...
> Although DST has always been a political issue, we need to discuss the biology associated with these decisions because the circadian clock plays a crucial role in how the outcome of these discussions potentially impacts our health and performance. Here, we give the necessary background to understand how the circadian clock, the social clock, the sun clock, time zones, and DST interact.
* https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019.0094...
That quote doesn't mention solar noon at all.
I've read about chronobiology. It's well established light exposure just before and after sleep are the primary zeitgebers. I think it's fair you support your claim instead of expecting everyone else to read several thousand words looking for something probably not there.
I've read about chronobiology. It's well established light exposure just before and after sleep are the primary zeitgebers. I think it's fair you support your claim instead of expecting everyone else to read several thousand words looking for something probably not there.
[deleted]
Circadian rhythms are fixed to the sun, not to the number on a dial. For a concrete example on how permanent DST will mess up people, look at Spain. The entire country should be on GMT+0, instead it's on GMT+1 because of Hitler not wanting separate timezones across the Reich. Spain has a reputation for getting up late, having lunch late, etc. The truth is, the Spanish people do all these things at the usual time, but their clocks are one hour fast. I doubt America will be pragmatic enough to just shift everything one hour forward, so you'll end up torturing school children to rise early to appease some desire for the clock to be showing 6 when you wake up. I certainly don't want office hours to start at 8 all year round. For another example - Russia tried permanent DST but after a year changed to permanent astronomical time because of such problems. DST is tolerable in summer, but awful in winter.
Still, maybe if that's the only way to kill switching clocks twice a year, it might be worth it and we could end up with later hours like Spain.
Still, maybe if that's the only way to kill switching clocks twice a year, it might be worth it and we could end up with later hours like Spain.
For me, winter without DST meant going to school in the dark and coming home in the dark. That certainly didn’t help my circadian rhythms...
I wonder what your preferred answer would be to these hypothetical children that noticed the sun's location at noon is not 'at the top of the sky' for half the year already.
And where do you live such that the sun is at the 'top of the sky' at noon?
Timezones aside (which basically average out an arbitrary time for the 1/24th of the planet you are standing in) there's the 23.5 degree axis, which means there's nowhere on the planet where the sun is at the 'top of the sky' all year.
And where do you live such that the sun is at the 'top of the sky' at noon?
Timezones aside (which basically average out an arbitrary time for the 1/24th of the planet you are standing in) there's the 23.5 degree axis, which means there's nowhere on the planet where the sun is at the 'top of the sky' all year.
"Top of the sky" means equidistant from sunrise and sunset.
'Top of the sky' is often the colloquial phrase for 'on the meridian line'. Which is valuable to know in itself.
Now, of course, there are differences between the mean solar day and the actual day, and the analemma, and all that, but to a first approximation, the sun is really closest to the top of the sky at noon, local time.
Now, of course, there are differences between the mean solar day and the actual day, and the analemma, and all that, but to a first approximation, the sun is really closest to the top of the sky at noon, local time.
> 'Top of the sky' is often the colloquial phrase for 'on the meridian line'. Which is valuable to know in itself.
I've never heard the phrase before, and it seems to be such a wildly unpopular term that running an incognito google search on the phrase gives me three pages that contain almost exclusively references to tall buildings (Sydney, Auckland, Dubai) and some songs with a similar name.
There's one reference in that set of 30 results that refers to the astronomical term 'zenith' -- which is what I'd have naively interpreted the phrase to mean (and informs my earlier questions to GP).
In any case, as per GP's plaintive concerns over children's potential confusion in 2121, we seem to be ignoring the facts that today schools start, and shops open, at 9am, and schools & offices are open Monday to Friday, etc etc because of what some people wanted a hundred years ago -- and I'd agree that not enough people ask the obvious questions about why we're still sticking to this craziness.
I've never heard the phrase before, and it seems to be such a wildly unpopular term that running an incognito google search on the phrase gives me three pages that contain almost exclusively references to tall buildings (Sydney, Auckland, Dubai) and some songs with a similar name.
There's one reference in that set of 30 results that refers to the astronomical term 'zenith' -- which is what I'd have naively interpreted the phrase to mean (and informs my earlier questions to GP).
In any case, as per GP's plaintive concerns over children's potential confusion in 2121, we seem to be ignoring the facts that today schools start, and shops open, at 9am, and schools & offices are open Monday to Friday, etc etc because of what some people wanted a hundred years ago -- and I'd agree that not enough people ask the obvious questions about why we're still sticking to this craziness.
"The sun is at its highest point" would be the common way to say it. I seriously didn't think anyone would have trouble with "top," but there you go.
When I spent Christmas in Reykjavik a few years ago, there was nominally 4 hours of (barely) daylight - 11:30 through 15:30.
But because the sun barely ever got much above the horizon, the slightest cloud cover meant it mostly felt like twilight.
I can't imagine anyone calling something 5 degrees above the horizon the 'top of the sky', but perhaps they did. I don't speak any Icelandic, so I can't really say for sure.
Interestingly the solar noon during winter (ie. not daylight savings) there is around 13:30 -- no one seemed to be terribly concerned it not being 12:00
But because the sun barely ever got much above the horizon, the slightest cloud cover meant it mostly felt like twilight.
I can't imagine anyone calling something 5 degrees above the horizon the 'top of the sky', but perhaps they did. I don't speak any Icelandic, so I can't really say for sure.
Interestingly the solar noon during winter (ie. not daylight savings) there is around 13:30 -- no one seemed to be terribly concerned it not being 12:00
While I agree moving to permanent DST is kinda nuts. It’s less nuts then flipping clocks twice a year.
Once we have stopped flipping we can then move back to Standard time at a future date.
Fighting insanity one battle at a time.
Once we have stopped flipping we can then move back to Standard time at a future date.
Fighting insanity one battle at a time.
Does it matter if it is on top of the sky at 11h, 12h or 13h? Noon or mid-day is still when the sun is at its highest point. Only noon does not have to be at 12.
No, it doesn't matter. Where I live, the time the sun is at its highest varies from 11:53 to 13:18 and at no time in the history of my city (I checked all the records) has a child ever asked why the sun isn't directly overhead precisely at noon.
Well, you must not live where I grew up, because I asked this very question...
...which lead to me grokking time zones, time, solar noon, etc in a way I don’t think I would have if I hadn’t asked. Somehow solar noon not being noon didn’t have a negative impact on me as a kid. Weird, right?
...which lead to me grokking time zones, time, solar noon, etc in a way I don’t think I would have if I hadn’t asked. Somehow solar noon not being noon didn’t have a negative impact on me as a kid. Weird, right?
My answer was (hopefully obviously) tongue-in-cheek with regards to this never actually happening, but more importantly, it was a response to the idea that children would find it strange that the sun isn't directly overhead at noon. I don't know how a child could find that strange if it so rarely even happens that it is directly overhead at noon.
What? Is there any place in the world that distinguishes "noon" and 12:00pm in everyday speech?
You're asking for a lot more trouble if you want to separate them.
How about "afternoon" -- can that start at 11:00 am?
(Yes, scientists can use the term "solar noon," but I'm talking about everyday speech.)
You're asking for a lot more trouble if you want to separate them.
How about "afternoon" -- can that start at 11:00 am?
(Yes, scientists can use the term "solar noon," but I'm talking about everyday speech.)
> want more evening sunlight in the summer.
This is so backwards... There's loads of evening light in the summer. I want more evening light in the winter.
This is so backwards... There's loads of evening light in the summer. I want more evening light in the winter.
We'd all like more light in the evening if it came for free, but an hour more light on the evening in the winter means an hour less light in the morning. Depending on where you live, that could mean the sun rising an hour after you get into work or school.
Waking, eating breakfast, and commuting before the sun rises sucks. Making it worse would, well, make it worse.
In the summer we don't have that problem, as even with the time change the sun usually rises before most people do.
Waking, eating breakfast, and commuting before the sun rises sucks. Making it worse would, well, make it worse.
In the summer we don't have that problem, as even with the time change the sun usually rises before most people do.
People live in places where the sun disappears for most of the day for months. Humans can adjust to just about any schedule. The biggest advantage is our bodies won't have to adjust twice a year for an arbitrary time change. I'm fine with either one being the standard, just stop changing it. I fully support this bill.
Where I am there is a two fold component to it... you have shorter usable days in the winter AND you also have earlier darkness for people because they shift it one hour earlier. that means that you go to work when it's dark out and come home when it's dark out. having an "extra" hour after work to relax would be a win. permanent DST is a win in my book.
The pandemic, in my opinion, has revealed that a lot of the things we used to say "can't be done" could actually be done. Vaccines in a year? Check. More white collar jobs working from home? Check. Closing down a huge portion of businesses without economic armageddon? Check. I think we can handle getting rid of DST. (or just making it permanent)
But you're saying we couldn't handle communities starting to transition to school and work an hour earlier, without changing the clock?
I love that in 50 years, the youth of that time will be taught that we used to change clocks twice a year, and they can laugh and wonder at the old-timey silliness of it all.
well, it's largely automated now days.. I think my stove clock (aka the power outage event recorder) is the only clock I manually adjust these days.
> well, it's largely automated now days
This almost makes it sound more ridiculous. It shows that we could easily switch to a different system and yet choose not to.
This almost makes it sound more ridiculous. It shows that we could easily switch to a different system and yet choose not to.
> well, it's largely automated now days
Sure, but somehow far too much of our code doesn't work right during time changes. Also for timezones at all while we're being honest.
Sure, but somehow far too much of our code doesn't work right during time changes. Also for timezones at all while we're being honest.
> aka the power outage event recorder
Man this is so true lol
Man this is so true lol
> Our European visitors are important to us. This site is currently unavailable to visitors from Europe ...
Does anybody have an alt mirror for this please? Genuinely interested, but can't view the news update from Europe.
Does anybody have an alt mirror for this please? Genuinely interested, but can't view the news update from Europe.
Here you go: https://archive.is/femP9
A bit disappointing, though. There's not much to the article.
Edited to add: There's more substance in this article in the Boston Globe:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/03/10/nation/think-daylight...
A bit disappointing, though. There's not much to the article.
Edited to add: There's more substance in this article in the Boston Globe:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/03/10/nation/think-daylight...
Are they all doing that, or just the one URL in the link? https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Sunshine+Protection+Act&iar=news&i...
[deleted]
Why are we making DST permanent rather than making the standard time permanent?
Light in the evening when you can use it, rather than during the day when you're stuck on conference calls.
Also, 'standard' offsets to GMT are fairly arbitrary anyway. We're not going to get employers to change operating hours, so it's paradoxically simpler to change the hours themselves.
Also, 'standard' offsets to GMT are fairly arbitrary anyway. We're not going to get employers to change operating hours, so it's paradoxically simpler to change the hours themselves.
What about all the people who work outside and need sunlight?
Let them change their start time. (They're probably doing that anyway - if you work outside and need sunlight, you're not starting at the same hour in March and June.)
If they can change their start time, so can you!
That assumes a tremendous amount of scheduling freedom on the part of the average retail worker or office drone, which I do not believe to be a correct assumption. Business Opens At 8 (or 9) is so ingrained as to be unlikely to change.
Tradespeople - particularly contractors - on the other hand, have a fair degree of freedom to decide when to start work, and they tend to start when the light starts (or shortly before) and stop aroundish the time the light fades. It doesn't really matter to them what the clock says, yet we continue to see arguments that DST is evil because it forces tradies to start at times that don't correspond with the light. To that I say, a) bullshit, b) prove it.
Tradespeople - particularly contractors - on the other hand, have a fair degree of freedom to decide when to start work, and they tend to start when the light starts (or shortly before) and stop aroundish the time the light fades. It doesn't really matter to them what the clock says, yet we continue to see arguments that DST is evil because it forces tradies to start at times that don't correspond with the light. To that I say, a) bullshit, b) prove it.
I can, and do. What's your point?
People like the sunshine. Getting rid of DST means you're always getting off work at 5:00 either in the dark or an hour or two before dark.
Making it always DST means 5 o'clock will be before sunset year-round.
Why is five o’clock the arbitrary getting off work time?
Historical reasons: American society has settled on 40 hours being the appropriate amount of work for the average person. Starting near the beginning of the day at 9:00 meant 8 hours later people would get off at 5:00. I've heard Ford started that convention, but I haven't really researched it. But I think business hours are now very firmly entrenched in American society and that it would be very difficult to change that convention.
Just take things to the logical conclusion - everyone should switch to UTC and quit all this screwing around with timezones and clock changes.
Time is a super sensitive topic.
If you want to take things to their logical conclusion, we should be using a sort of UTC decimal time (10 hours in a day, 10 (was it 100? can't remember) minutes in an hour, 10 (same question as for minutes) seconds in a minute.
Switching to a single timezone would mean that days are upside down. Imagine some timezone where the sun rises at 23:00 and sets at 13:00. Let alone the fact that a decent chunk of the world doesn't even use 24 hour time (I'm looking especially at you, US!).
If you want to take things to their logical conclusion, we should be using a sort of UTC decimal time (10 hours in a day, 10 (was it 100? can't remember) minutes in an hour, 10 (same question as for minutes) seconds in a minute.
Switching to a single timezone would mean that days are upside down. Imagine some timezone where the sun rises at 23:00 and sets at 13:00. Let alone the fact that a decent chunk of the world doesn't even use 24 hour time (I'm looking especially at you, US!).
> Imagine some timezone where the sun rises at 23:00 and sets at 13:00
You just might convince me to adopt that kind of timekeeping, if "Monday" didn't suddenly become "Tuesday" while I was eating breakfast!
But seriously, every time someone floats the idea of worldwide UTC, I can't imagine they've thought through all the new problems that would arise.
We have different time zones, not because we're dumb. It's because the Earth is round. The time zones are an intrinsic property of {ball Earth} + {human biology}
If we lived in Flatland, it wouldn't be an issue. If we were robots with no circadian rhythm or desire, then it wouldn't be an issue. But we're humans on a globe. Different locations are going to be out-of-sync no matter what. Might as well reflect that in our timekeeping.
(EDIT: I'm agreeing with you, BTW. Just re-read this and it sounds kinda like I'm arguing with your comment. I'm not. I'm yelling at the strawman :)
You just might convince me to adopt that kind of timekeeping, if "Monday" didn't suddenly become "Tuesday" while I was eating breakfast!
But seriously, every time someone floats the idea of worldwide UTC, I can't imagine they've thought through all the new problems that would arise.
We have different time zones, not because we're dumb. It's because the Earth is round. The time zones are an intrinsic property of {ball Earth} + {human biology}
If we lived in Flatland, it wouldn't be an issue. If we were robots with no circadian rhythm or desire, then it wouldn't be an issue. But we're humans on a globe. Different locations are going to be out-of-sync no matter what. Might as well reflect that in our timekeeping.
(EDIT: I'm agreeing with you, BTW. Just re-read this and it sounds kinda like I'm arguing with your comment. I'm not. I'm yelling at the strawman :)
Oh, this segues nicely from my DST, my favorite bikeshedding topic into my second favorite one!
Base 12 is better than decimal in every way. It divides cleanly by 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 12. Compare that to decimal, where you have 1, 2, 5, 10. It's much better for scheduling. With decimal you couldn't have a nice, clean schedule for a factory with 3 shifts per day for example. 60 minutes (which is a multiple of 12) gives you a lot of ways to break up an hour, vs 100 minutes.
I had a friend once rant about how we should switch everything to base 12. It's obviously crazy given the effort vs reward, but I think we would have been better off to have done so way back when.
Base 12 is better than decimal in every way. It divides cleanly by 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 12. Compare that to decimal, where you have 1, 2, 5, 10. It's much better for scheduling. With decimal you couldn't have a nice, clean schedule for a factory with 3 shifts per day for example. 60 minutes (which is a multiple of 12) gives you a lot of ways to break up an hour, vs 100 minutes.
I had a friend once rant about how we should switch everything to base 12. It's obviously crazy given the effort vs reward, but I think we would have been better off to have done so way back when.
It would have probably been better, but it's an utterly fundamental change. It's like changing time zones, switching to decimal time, getting rid of DST, changing measurement systems from whatever to metric and learning a new language at the same time.
Base 10 is so embedded in what we do, that a switch to base 12 is the kind of thing that would be done when we rebuild civilization after the first alien attack :-)
Base 10 is so embedded in what we do, that a switch to base 12 is the kind of thing that would be done when we rebuild civilization after the first alien attack :-)
If our number system was base 12 then that would be the best of both worlds. Metric and highly divisible.
Haha, this is mainly "programmer" viewpoint, for most people around the globe, timezones works flawlessly.
And for programmers, they do/should use UTC everywhere already ;-)
Since switching to universal UTC would not also change the Earth from an oblate spheroid to a flat Earth, it would not eliminate the need for timezones. At most, it would perhaps cause us to rename them to spacezones.
Our American freedoms would never allow that. Nor do I suspect any countries other than dictatorships would get the cooperation of their citizens.
Not logical at all.[1]
[1] https://qntm.org/abolish
[1] https://qntm.org/abolish
also just switch to metric system while we are at it.
Respect waking with the rising sun and banish DST for good. We should instead be working toward adjusting that archaic and arbitrary 8-4/9-5 versus changing the clocks around.
Yes, this is the right way to solve it. Forcing DST on everyone in winter without adjusting school starting times is a horrible and selfish idea.
Fatal car accidents in the United States spike by 6% during the workweek following the "spring forward" to daylight saving time, resulting in about 28 additional deaths each year. [1]
1 = https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200130144410.h...
1 = https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200130144410.h...
I would suggest that is correlated with sleep deprivation rather than lightness/darkness as following weeks evidently the rate returns to basically the same. That would not be true if the darkness was the issue.
I support the change, but the timeline seems a bit unrealistic to me. There are a lot of systems that will need to be updated to not expect time changes, and knowing how long such things tend to take, expecting everything to be ready within a few months (minus however long the bill actually took to pass) seems unlikely. Plus ideally you'd give other jurisdictions like Canada and Mexico a chance to see if they want to come along. I'd think planning to keep DST in 2022 would be a lot more realistic than planning to never change again as of now.
Time zones change multiple times a year throughout the globe. For example, the time zone database changed five times in 2020.
If your time code doesn't already depend on an externally updating time database, you're already doing it wrong.
If your time code doesn't already depend on an externally updating time database, you're already doing it wrong.
Yeah, I know in theory that's the case (although I didn't realize how often time zones changed). I still expect there will be problems on that timeline. As for how serious they would be or how much difference an extra year would make, I don't know.
I recently change the subnet my house network runs on. 90% of my devices just switched with DHCP, but there were a couple of laggards. It was a good exercise in figuring out where I had gotten lazy with my setup.
I feel like this would be a good exercise in how we handle clocks. :)
I feel like this would be a good exercise in how we handle clocks. :)
I would love for someone more well-versed to correct me on this, but I remember reading a decade ago about how the Roman priesthood (the calendar-keepers) would fudge with the dates to conform to their political desires, ranging from 200-500 days at the most extreme.
The fact that we can consolidate this down to only disagreeing on how to set our hours is what I'd call progress![1]
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_calendars
The fact that we can consolidate this down to only disagreeing on how to set our hours is what I'd call progress![1]
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_calendars
Russia did that in 2011 and then reverted the decision in 2014. Now Russia has standard time all year long.
"The 2011 move to impose permanent “summer time” ... forced tens of millions to straggle to their jobs in pitch darkness during the winter months. In the depths of December, the sun didn’t clear the horizon in Moscow until 10 a.m."
https://apnews.com/article/7b85f8edc6d84ee087d3aa3880cc6af7
"The 2011 move to impose permanent “summer time” ... forced tens of millions to straggle to their jobs in pitch darkness during the winter months. In the depths of December, the sun didn’t clear the horizon in Moscow until 10 a.m."
https://apnews.com/article/7b85f8edc6d84ee087d3aa3880cc6af7
All this is really doing is forcing everyone to wake up earlier in the morning. You're basically calling what is now 7am, 8am. Instead of forcing schools and companies to start earlier, you just repaint the clocks so these institutions will go with this without resisting.
We already know that many children suffer academically, socially, psychologically because they don't get enough sleep. How many employees also suffer because of this? About a third of people are not "morning people" and get most of their productivity and mental clarity later in the day. These people will suffer the most and at the expense of those who are naturally inclined to be most productive earlier in the day.
We shouldn't do this. We should do the opposite and end daylight savings for even half the year. Let companies choose to start earlier if they want in March if they want more light for their employees. Some companies will do this and some won't. Those companies that do will attract those who are morning people. The companies that don't will attract the opposite. Stop allowing a small group of morning people force what works for them onto everyone else.
We already know that many children suffer academically, socially, psychologically because they don't get enough sleep. How many employees also suffer because of this? About a third of people are not "morning people" and get most of their productivity and mental clarity later in the day. These people will suffer the most and at the expense of those who are naturally inclined to be most productive earlier in the day.
We shouldn't do this. We should do the opposite and end daylight savings for even half the year. Let companies choose to start earlier if they want in March if they want more light for their employees. Some companies will do this and some won't. Those companies that do will attract those who are morning people. The companies that don't will attract the opposite. Stop allowing a small group of morning people force what works for them onto everyone else.
I'm not sure if this would introduce more or less bugs in software. It would at least make this Google Cloud SQL for MySQL issue less annoying. They don't support tz_info, so you have to manually adjust for DST offsets. Guess what I'm doing this weekend at 2/3am PDT/PST?
https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/74600960
https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/74600960
I don’t care if you eliminate DST or make it permanent. One or the other. Just do it.
Some states, like Washington, have already introduced permanent DST. The only thing they lack is federal permission to stay on DST. States can already permanently stay on non-DST time, like most of AZ does.
For the sake of every parent of a child under the age of 5 - please pass this. Twice a year we have to spend an entire week slowly shifting sleep schedules in the hopes of a successful switch. :)
Melatonin is safe for kids. It's what we use for the spring time change (and international travel).
> Opponents of the bill say DST makes it hard on school children and parents who have to wait at the bus stop in dark hours of the morning.
Here's an idea - let students (and parents) sleep for an additional hour rather than make them wake up before the crack of dawn for no reason.
Here's an idea - let students (and parents) sleep for an additional hour rather than make them wake up before the crack of dawn for no reason.
> Here's an idea - let students (and parents) sleep for an additional hour rather than make them wake up before the crack of dawn for no reason.
Turns out that that doing just this has quantifiable benefits[1].
[1] "Teens get more sleep, show improved grades and attendance with later school start time, researchers find": https://www.washington.edu/news/2018/12/12/high-school-start...
Turns out that that doing just this has quantifiable benefits[1].
[1] "Teens get more sleep, show improved grades and attendance with later school start time, researchers find": https://www.washington.edu/news/2018/12/12/high-school-start...
I think it's mostly the teachers and the administrators who advocate for the earlier times. Well, that and parents who drop off their kids before work. A later start would be great for students.
Work schedules would have to change. Schools are basically a child care service with varying qualities of value-add education thrown in. Maybe after a year of WFH being normalized, companies will be more accepting of flexible schedules.
I used to tutor at a Boys & Girls Club in a very low-income area in Massachusetts. The way they assign students to schools is weird (at least to me, I didn’t grow up here). Students need to apply, even to public schools, and they’re offered spots through some combination of lottery, location, and grades/test scores. One of the girls I tutored went to a school that was pretty far away from her home - something like a 90 minute bus ride thanks to traffic. When I asked her about how she ended up at a school so far away she casually explained that her parents had to be at work early so she had to go to a school where she’d get on the bus as early as possible. It broke my heart.
I had a 70-80 minute bus ride every day for 7 years, while pretty annoying, I wouldn't call it "heart-breaking". You did homework, read books, listened to music, etc. It was just a thing you did.
As a kid, it just was.
As a kid, it just was.
Sure, and I’m glad that worked out for you! But for the population at large, lots of research suggests that early wake up times are detrimental to student outcomes as a population.
Work schedules would not need to change if one salary would be all you need to support a family. This world we've raised for ourselves was underpinned by a primary wage earner, and a primary homemaker. We even used to subsidize homemaking. We've gone backwards all in the name of progress.
Alternatively, let both parents work, have careers, and be theoretically capable of supporting themselves independently, and also reduce the minimum number of hours people are expected to work in a week in order for it to count as a "real" job, so that both parents are also able to spend adequate time with their families.
I'd like to see some change, but I'm not sure that just going back to some version of how it was done when my generation was young necessarily counts as progress.
I'd like to see some change, but I'm not sure that just going back to some version of how it was done when my generation was young necessarily counts as progress.
Dual-income households were always a thing, even in the most gender-restrictive days of the 1950s. The idea that one male breadwinner would provide for a whole household was always an upper-middle-class fantasy.
> Dual-income households were always a thing, even in the most gender-restrictive days of the 1950s. The idea that one male breadwinner would provide for a whole household was always an upper-middle-class fantasy.
Source? because this isn't my partner's experience. Her grand parents owned a house, cars and raised more than 5 kids on a single factory worker salary. It would be just impossible nowadays in most of the west.
Source? because this isn't my partner's experience. Her grand parents owned a house, cars and raised more than 5 kids on a single factory worker salary. It would be just impossible nowadays in most of the west.
Here you have stats for 1950 per age brackets https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2000/feb/wk3/art03.htm
Basically you have more then third of women working in any except oldest one. Third of women is a lot of women, a lot of households.
Moreover, people kind of tend to forget that women needs to eat even if husband died or got sick, even if they are single, even if husband is unemployed, even if husband is alcoholic, even if husband is in prison. People also kind of tend to forget that having to marry anyone just so that someone feeds you is one path toward disasterous abusive marriages you are trapped in (where you still have to pretend everything is ok for appareances sake).
And 1950 is when economy was the best, male employment was like 95%. And you still had women who were married and they worked and their income mattered to family. (Surprising example is Rosa Parks who worked for money and loss of income was issue to her and her husband.)
Basically you have more then third of women working in any except oldest one. Third of women is a lot of women, a lot of households.
Moreover, people kind of tend to forget that women needs to eat even if husband died or got sick, even if they are single, even if husband is unemployed, even if husband is alcoholic, even if husband is in prison. People also kind of tend to forget that having to marry anyone just so that someone feeds you is one path toward disasterous abusive marriages you are trapped in (where you still have to pretend everything is ok for appareances sake).
And 1950 is when economy was the best, male employment was like 95%. And you still had women who were married and they worked and their income mattered to family. (Surprising example is Rosa Parks who worked for money and loss of income was issue to her and her husband.)
> We've gone backwards all in the name of progress.
It's not done in the name of progress, it's done in the name of profitability.
The rate of profit and worker productivity are at all time highs, but who benefits? Worker compensation has been stagnant and decoupled from profitability and productivity increases for close to five decades now. Even engineer compensation hasn't kept up with productivity, inflation and cost of living increases.
It's not done in the name of progress, it's done in the name of profitability.
The rate of profit and worker productivity are at all time highs, but who benefits? Worker compensation has been stagnant and decoupled from profitability and productivity increases for close to five decades now. Even engineer compensation hasn't kept up with productivity, inflation and cost of living increases.
That assumes one parent from each family wants to forego a career to focus entirely on raising kids though.
If they both want to work, then child care should be affordable for the dual income family. Generally it's not which is why schools are required to fill that care gap and be in sync with working hours.
There's a bit of a math problem there, though. It's hard to make things work out so that the child care is affordable for the parents, the teachers get reasonable compensation, and you're meeting reasonable (and, depending on where you are, legal) standards for child-caregiver ratios.
Doubly so if "affordable for the parents" means "affordable for parents who are in the same income bracket as your average pre school teacher."
Source: I've served on the board of a day care.
Doubly so if "affordable for the parents" means "affordable for parents who are in the same income bracket as your average pre school teacher."
Source: I've served on the board of a day care.
True, although kids are only of childcare age for a few years, so if all adults share the cost burden of childcare for everyone throughout their working lives rather than just paying for their own needs for a few years, the math works out a lot easier. (IE, childcare paid or subsidized by the government.)
The other piece of the puzzle though is that there need to be sufficient providers, which can't happen instantaneously. So you'd have to scale up such an initiative in a sensible way.
The other piece of the puzzle though is that there need to be sufficient providers, which can't happen instantaneously. So you'd have to scale up such an initiative in a sensible way.
This is where subsidies or government programs should come in to patch over where the market fails to meet families' needs.
Those families shouldn't have children then.
I know that borders on callousness, and obviously I don't think we shouldn't take care of single parent households that don't have an option or that the child tax credit shouldn't be high enough so kids don't go hungry. Just if you reduce this to the choice to have a child and a lack of outlying circumstances, you shouldn't have a kid if you don't have someone ready to take care of them and the freedom to make that choice.
I know that borders on callousness, and obviously I don't think we shouldn't take care of single parent households that don't have an option or that the child tax credit shouldn't be high enough so kids don't go hungry. Just if you reduce this to the choice to have a child and a lack of outlying circumstances, you shouldn't have a kid if you don't have someone ready to take care of them and the freedom to make that choice.
Being completely dependent on another to be able to live your life can lead to all kinds of abuse.
Single parent household needs to be a supported scenario for public services.
I agree with that as well. Supporting single parent families can be much cheaper in the long run.
Well, maybe, but many parents would probably both work anyways because they would be competing with other dual income family units for housing, schooling and other cost intensive resources.
[deleted]
This wouldn also imply return to same domestic violence rates as used to be, because half population would be dependent again with no power to change own situation. Even currently the rates of it goes up and down with who is getting jobs.
Also, there are other reasons why the situation you desribes as ideal sparked the protests back then - for many people ir was unhappy unsatisfying sitiation.
Also, there are other reasons why the situation you desribes as ideal sparked the protests back then - for many people ir was unhappy unsatisfying sitiation.
Later drop offs would be exceedingly difficult for lower income families because their schedules are fixed and not as flexible as higher income jobs. I think permanent DST is a long time coming, but after the pandemic, it’s clear the lack of flexibility that lower income families face.
> I think it's mostly the teachers and the administrators who advocate for the earlier times. Well, that and parents who drop off their kids before work.
So what if teachers have children they need to drop off before work? That leads to some kind of infinite recursion.
So what if teachers have children they need to drop off before work? That leads to some kind of infinite recursion.
Earlier times are for high school sports competitions.
Everyone has to get up early all year, so the track team does not have to stay up late a couple times per year. Well, also football, basketball, etc
Everyone has to get up early all year, so the track team does not have to stay up late a couple times per year. Well, also football, basketball, etc
After a study with the same findings came out the school district my son was in changed it's start time. To an earlier start time. This is in Texas so not surprising.
Here's an argument for DST I haven't seen yet - circadian rhythms. Forget about "maximizing daylight."
Your circadian rhythm is actually mediated/regulated/communicated to every cell in your body by a diurnal oscillation of YOUR BODY TEMPERATURE, which is coolest around 3am and warmest around 3pm.
These times just so happen to correspond with the times of coolest and hottest surface air temperatures on earth - and it's not a coincidence that our bodies evolved that way.
Now, in the summer, the hottest time of the day is actually LATER than it is in the winter, since the sun spends more time in the sky and the earth has more time to heat up. So it makes sense to align our circadian rhythms with that by springing forward one hour before summer, and then falling back one hour before winter - when the hottest time of day starts to edge earlier.
Your circadian rhythm is actually mediated/regulated/communicated to every cell in your body by a diurnal oscillation of YOUR BODY TEMPERATURE, which is coolest around 3am and warmest around 3pm.
These times just so happen to correspond with the times of coolest and hottest surface air temperatures on earth - and it's not a coincidence that our bodies evolved that way.
Now, in the summer, the hottest time of the day is actually LATER than it is in the winter, since the sun spends more time in the sky and the earth has more time to heat up. So it makes sense to align our circadian rhythms with that by springing forward one hour before summer, and then falling back one hour before winter - when the hottest time of day starts to edge earlier.
That is the whole point of DST, although many people seem not to realize it. It allows us to wake up around sunrise all year long, which is our bodies' natural tendency.
Another thing nobody seems to realize is that we've already tried this experiment once before, and it was an utter failure. Quoting Wikipedia:
Permanent DST in the US was briefly enacted by President Nixon in 1974, in response to the 1973 oil crisis. The proposal was initially supported by an estimated 79% of the public; that support dropped to 42% after its first winter, owing to the harshness of dark winter mornings that permanent DST creates. An estimated six school children were also killed by motorists due to the new law. The new permanent DST law was retracted within the year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_time_observation_in_...
Another thing nobody seems to realize is that we've already tried this experiment once before, and it was an utter failure. Quoting Wikipedia:
Permanent DST in the US was briefly enacted by President Nixon in 1974, in response to the 1973 oil crisis. The proposal was initially supported by an estimated 79% of the public; that support dropped to 42% after its first winter, owing to the harshness of dark winter mornings that permanent DST creates. An estimated six school children were also killed by motorists due to the new law. The new permanent DST law was retracted within the year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_time_observation_in_...
All of this is extremely dependent on latitude so if you actually wanted a system that accounted for it it would have to be a lot more complicated than wide vertical bands that go from basically the tropic to the pole.
Where I live these things vary by a lot more than an hour, so DST has a meaningful effect on any of these supposed benefits for about, if I'm being generous, 2-3 weeks a year. It's silly.
Where I live these things vary by a lot more than an hour, so DST has a meaningful effect on any of these supposed benefits for about, if I'm being generous, 2-3 weeks a year. It's silly.
The body temperature cycle is regulated by light exposure.[1]
[1] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101014144314.h...
[1] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101014144314.h...
> "Teens get more sleep, show improved grades and attendance with later school start time, researchers find"
But that's relative to the clock, and where the clock is relative to daylight hours has no relevance.
But that's relative to the clock, and where the clock is relative to daylight hours has no relevance.
I'm responding to this comment:
> let students (and parents) sleep for an additional hour
> let students (and parents) sleep for an additional hour
Yeah, what’s stopping schools from having their own “DST/Standard Time” switch. Schools should set their hours according to what makes sense for students. We don’t need the whole country to set its clock around students.
IIRC, parents--particularly parents with younger kids. The highschoolers need (in their view) to be home earlier than the middle- and elementary schoolers to be the responsible party so the parents can come home at the end of the workday.
The problem is deeply structural.
The problem is deeply structural.
Sports are another big reason parents want older kids to get to school earlier than younger kids (as they can't take everyone at once, or else you need way more busses)—longer daylight hours after school for practice. Any attempt to change the schedule to get older kids to school later and younger ones earlier, will run into strong resistance from Sports Parents™, no matter the benefits to health or academics.
("why don't they just have the sports teams do one short practice in the morning, and one short practice in the afternoon?" 1. some of them actually do that already, despite the crazy-early school start time, and 2. for the less-insanely-dedicated sports that can't rely on parents to drop all the team members off before school, you'd need to run extra busses just for the sports kids, if they're showing up earlier than everyone else, and 3. Depending on the sport, one long practice is better and/or a lot more convenient than two short ones)
("why don't they just have the sports teams do one short practice in the morning, and one short practice in the afternoon?" 1. some of them actually do that already, despite the crazy-early school start time, and 2. for the less-insanely-dedicated sports that can't rely on parents to drop all the team members off before school, you'd need to run extra busses just for the sports kids, if they're showing up earlier than everyone else, and 3. Depending on the sport, one long practice is better and/or a lot more convenient than two short ones)
>"why don't they just have the sports teams do one short practice in the morning, and one short practice in the afternoon?"
Another reason is that most older kids don't want to be covered in sweat for their entire high school career and having kids communally shower at school is seemingly something that is rightfully being phased out.
Another reason is that most older kids don't want to be covered in sweat for their entire high school career and having kids communally shower at school is seemingly something that is rightfully being phased out.
> having kids communally shower at school is seemingly something that is rightfully being phased out.
For a sports team, that seems silly.
Most sports have enough weird contact that the showers are probably the least of the problems.
Now, if you want to argue that sports, in general, and school should be separate, I'm all ears.
For a sports team, that seems silly.
Most sports have enough weird contact that the showers are probably the least of the problems.
Now, if you want to argue that sports, in general, and school should be separate, I'm all ears.
Interestingly enough, it was the exact opposite when I was in high school. Elementary got out at about 2:45, middle around 3:15, and HS at 4:20. I was very appreciative of our 9:05 start time.
This has never been the case anywhere I've gone to school - outside of special classes, every school got out at the same time.
That said, there'd be nothing to prevent a school district from adjusting both school times if local parents demanded this be accommodated.
That said, there'd be nothing to prevent a school district from adjusting both school times if local parents demanded this be accommodated.
Some school districts are K-8 or 9-12 only, which I've experienced myself. Taking California as an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_districts_in_Ca...
> In California there are 560 Elementary districts, 87 High School districts, 330 Unified districts.
(I do think that this isn't a great argument against switching to DST permanently. I think if this was legislated then the school districts would just adapt now, especially since a significant chunk of students are still doing remote learning.)
> In California there are 560 Elementary districts, 87 High School districts, 330 Unified districts.
(I do think that this isn't a great argument against switching to DST permanently. I think if this was legislated then the school districts would just adapt now, especially since a significant chunk of students are still doing remote learning.)
Where do highschoolers end school sooner then elementary?
All over the place. When I was in school, the same buses that serviced the high schools also serviced the elementary schools. So the high school students would get picked up, and then the elementary kids would be next after that.
Highschoolers here all use public transport. They have more classes then small kids.
Small kids have few classes and before/after optional program that basically do childcare for parents. They are free to go much sooner. Many of them come in and out by public transport too.
Small kids have few classes and before/after optional program that basically do childcare for parents. They are free to go much sooner. Many of them come in and out by public transport too.
Suburban Chicago, at least 15 years ago. I'd get home ~30 minutes before my siblings and I'd keep an eye on them until my mom came home.
It's a great idea, and would work fine for younger kids. High school kids with after-school jobs and sports might find a conflict, though.
I'm in the camp of "seriously, fuck high school sports" because entire districts bend their will and finances to support football programs (other sports? what other sports?) to the detriment of everyone else in the school.
But that POV is spitting into the wind. And god help you if you're in a smaller area where high school sports are the entire social center of the community.
I'm in the camp of "seriously, fuck high school sports" because entire districts bend their will and finances to support football programs (other sports? what other sports?) to the detriment of everyone else in the school.
But that POV is spitting into the wind. And god help you if you're in a smaller area where high school sports are the entire social center of the community.
If elementary schools changed schedules by an hour, some parents of elementary school kids would need to change their schedule by an hour as well. When the whole society does this all at once, the individual parents/coworkers/bosses don’t have to negotiate or coordinate anything; it “just happens”.
If we switch to permanent DST, and the whole of society compensates by setting schedules back an hour, all we’ve done is create de-facto permanent standard time. That’s the best-case scenario.
I have a better idea. Let’s just actually switch to permanent standard time, so we don’t have to hope that society shakes itself out.
I have a better idea. Let’s just actually switch to permanent standard time, so we don’t have to hope that society shakes itself out.
I highly doubt that would actually happen, though. During the last year, we've encouraged folks to work at home and schools have been closed. Yet those folks that work retail or healthcare or factories still had to go to work like normal. Considering how much of the population that covers, I highly doubt folks would be changing their schedules.
After all, if one group of folks can figure out how to work around the change, there is no reason for everyone else to need changes.
After all, if one group of folks can figure out how to work around the change, there is no reason for everyone else to need changes.
Exactly. We, the people, need to exert back pressure on a deeply flawed system to force it to happen. Such a change wouldn't be nearly as problematic if union membership, for example, was widespread.
How does union membership help align a work team that needs two members for a team job (for task-related or safety-related reasons) and exactly one of the two needs to change schedules because their kid's school changed schedule by an hour?
A lot of elementary schools have before and after school programs so it'll be a mixed bag.
> We don’t need the whole country to set its clock around students.
Don't we, though? Parents have jobs, jobs have schedules, and those schedules need to be coordinated with school drop-off and pickup times.
Don't we, though? Parents have jobs, jobs have schedules, and those schedules need to be coordinated with school drop-off and pickup times.
And if it's functionally impossible for the overwhelming majority of employed adults who are parents to meet those schedules due to school times being shifted... businesses will either adapt their schedules to meet the new reality or they'll fire 75%+ of their staff.
I know which one I'd bet on.
I know which one I'd bet on.
Schools also have to take bus schedules into account. A district with elementary / middle / and high school will have 3 separate bus schedules if there's enough population.
My 8 year old nephews' school day doesn't begin until 9:40, but it ends after 5pm and allows very little sunlight for play time in the evenings. I know that when I was that age, I was far more concerned about being able to go out and play than whether the sun was up when I got up.
My 8 year old nephews' school day doesn't begin until 9:40, but it ends after 5pm and allows very little sunlight for play time in the evenings. I know that when I was that age, I was far more concerned about being able to go out and play than whether the sun was up when I got up.
I wouldn't be surprised if part of what drives school start times to be earlier is the prevalence of dual income households, where both parents need to get to work, and (particularly with younger children) children need to be cared for.
This brings to mind my own memories of childhood; I have a sense leftover from that that afternoon daycare is relatively common, but early morning daycare perhaps less so?
This brings to mind my own memories of childhood; I have a sense leftover from that that afternoon daycare is relatively common, but early morning daycare perhaps less so?
Just so I understand what you're saying: we should first move the clocks an hour ahead (permanently), then delay our schedules an hour, then ???, and then, I guess, profit?
How exactly does this differ from not moving the clocks an hour ahead permanently and not delaying our schedule for the day for an hour?
How exactly does this differ from not moving the clocks an hour ahead permanently and not delaying our schedule for the day for an hour?
This problem (if it even is a problem) affects a small number of students in a handful of regions in the country. Individual schools/school districts are free to come up with their own personalized solutions. There is no reason to involve the other 95% of the population in this game.
Seriously.
If schools want to start at 8am instead of 7am in the winter, then they should just do that.
If schools want to start at 8am instead of 7am in the winter, then they should just do that.
There are 70+ million children in US, so at least 70+ million parents affected by this "game". That would be half of the working population of 150MM.
Not all children are of school going age. Not all parents work strict 8am-5pm office jobs. Some schools/school districts already start late. A large chunk of the country doesn't have problems with daylight because of location.
My overall point is - the equations of labor, electricity, fuel, school, daycare, geographical times and more are complex enough in this country today that it is okay to let individual schools/offices etc. pick what timings best work for them rather than artificially trying to fit everyone in the same mold.
My overall point is - the equations of labor, electricity, fuel, school, daycare, geographical times and more are complex enough in this country today that it is okay to let individual schools/offices etc. pick what timings best work for them rather than artificially trying to fit everyone in the same mold.
Is changing the definition of the hours the best way to solve this problem though? It seems tangentially related at best.
You have more daylight in the evening and can actually have some time to enjoy said daylight rather than spending the entire day indoors and going home when it's dark out.
American high schools have to be out around 3 PM to allow for enough time for sports teams to practice. Other schools end up synchronizing to this schedule. A non-trivial reason is that high school teachers with young children need to have them synced with their own work schedules and teachers have some level of control over how school days are scheduled.
Anyway, like everything in the US, blame the obsession with high school athletics.
Anyway, like everything in the US, blame the obsession with high school athletics.
I have no great love for high school sports, but at least it's a mechanism to get kids moving. Given the obesity epidemic, a solid physical education option seems useful. Definitely has grown into something way beyond that though.
PE class is one thing, building the whole school schedule around the football team's needs is another.
How about we do it the other way: Eliminate daylight saving time and make standard time permanent?
Oh hell no. The late day light is WAY better than early day light. I am not going to mow my lawn at 5 a.m. and piss off all my neighbors (plus the grass tends to have dew and be wet early). Mowing my lawn at 7 pm (if it is still light out), is not a problem.
Daylight time proponents are effectively advocating that the standard work day start an hour earlier relative to the sunlight.
I tend to disagree - better to let people sleep. There's a reason "standard" time was set up that way in the first place. I suspect it works better with our circadian rhythm that way.
I tend to disagree - better to let people sleep. There's a reason "standard" time was set up that way in the first place. I suspect it works better with our circadian rhythm that way.
> I tend to disagree - better to let people sleep.
I'm not advocating to move around the standard work day, but grown adults could just go to sleep an hour earlier. "let people sleep" makes no sense. It wouldn't take away an hour of their sleep.
I'm not advocating to move around the standard work day, but grown adults could just go to sleep an hour earlier. "let people sleep" makes no sense. It wouldn't take away an hour of their sleep.
This isn’t about “grown adults” and their capabilities. It’s about the well-being of society as a whole. There’s a lot more to consider than “when should working people show up for work”?
Note that a significant portion of society doesn’t have a day job — kids, retired/elderly, caregivers & home-parents, disabled and unable to work, etc. In fact, the needs of these groups ought to be prioritized, since as you said, working adults can adapt.
Note that a significant portion of society doesn’t have a day job — kids, retired/elderly, caregivers & home-parents, disabled and unable to work, etc. In fact, the needs of these groups ought to be prioritized, since as you said, working adults can adapt.
Adults are sleep deprived not because of sun, but because of evening activities - games, reading internet, movies. They value a bit more entertainment or a bit more work more then sleep.
Half a year there is dark long before adults go to sleep and also dark in the morning. Sun is not preventing sleep, but people dont sleep.
Half a year there is dark long before adults go to sleep and also dark in the morning. Sun is not preventing sleep, but people dont sleep.
You seem to be conflating two problems. The fact that many people stay up too late entertaining themselves doesn’t change how people as a whole respond physiologically to the presence and absence of sunlight, or how that ought to factor in to policy decisions.
The majority of year there is dark long before adults go to sleep. Adults go to sleep at same times as during summer, the dark is not making them going to sleep more.
For all practical purposes, sun is completely irrelevant to adults sleeping.
For all practical purposes, sun is completely irrelevant to adults sleeping.
I seem to post this for every DST story, so I might as well continue the tradition:
The folks who study this:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronobiology
Seem to have come to a consensus that if we're going to get rid of DST, then health-wise it is best to have Standard Time year-round:
> As an international organization of scientists dedicated to studying circadian and other biological rhythms, the Society for Research on Biological Rhythms (SRBR) engaged experts in the field to write a Position Paper on the consequences of choosing to live on DST or Standard Time (ST). The authors take the position that, based on comparisons of large populations living in DST or ST or on western versus eastern edges of time zones, the advantages of permanent ST outweigh switching to DST annually or permanently.
* https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/07487304198541...
For a longer-read, referencing quite a bit of academic literature, but a conclusionary snippet:
> In summary, the scientific literature strongly argues against the switching between DST and Standard Time and even more so against adopting DST permanently. The latter would exaggerate all the effects described above /beyond/ the simple extension of DST from approximately 8 months/year to 12 months/year (depending on country) since /body clocks/ are generally even later during winter than during the long photoperiods of summer (with DST) (Kantermann et al., 2007; Hadlow et al., 2014, 2018; Hashizaki et al., 2018). Perennial DST increases SJL prevalence even more, as described above.
* https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019.0094...
Other position papers that I've dug up over the years when curiosity got the better of me:
> Society for Research on Biological Rhythms (SRBR) is dedicated to advancing rigorous, peer-reviewed science and evidence-based policies related to sleep and circadian biology.
* https://srbr.org/advocacy/daylight-saving-time-presskit/
* (refs, with pro and con): https://srbr.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/DST-References-S...
European Sleep Research Society:
* https://esrs.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/To_the_EU_Commiss...
American Academy of Sleep Medicine (with 36 footnotes if you want to dig further):
* https://jcsm.aasm.org/doi/10.5664/jcsm.8780
* https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.8780
The Centre for Chronobiology, based at the Psychiatric University Hospital (University of Basel):
* http://www.chronobiology.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/JBR-D...
* http://www.chronobiology.ch/
The folks who study this:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronobiology
Seem to have come to a consensus that if we're going to get rid of DST, then health-wise it is best to have Standard Time year-round:
> As an international organization of scientists dedicated to studying circadian and other biological rhythms, the Society for Research on Biological Rhythms (SRBR) engaged experts in the field to write a Position Paper on the consequences of choosing to live on DST or Standard Time (ST). The authors take the position that, based on comparisons of large populations living in DST or ST or on western versus eastern edges of time zones, the advantages of permanent ST outweigh switching to DST annually or permanently.
* https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/07487304198541...
For a longer-read, referencing quite a bit of academic literature, but a conclusionary snippet:
> In summary, the scientific literature strongly argues against the switching between DST and Standard Time and even more so against adopting DST permanently. The latter would exaggerate all the effects described above /beyond/ the simple extension of DST from approximately 8 months/year to 12 months/year (depending on country) since /body clocks/ are generally even later during winter than during the long photoperiods of summer (with DST) (Kantermann et al., 2007; Hadlow et al., 2014, 2018; Hashizaki et al., 2018). Perennial DST increases SJL prevalence even more, as described above.
* https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019.0094...
Other position papers that I've dug up over the years when curiosity got the better of me:
> Society for Research on Biological Rhythms (SRBR) is dedicated to advancing rigorous, peer-reviewed science and evidence-based policies related to sleep and circadian biology.
* https://srbr.org/advocacy/daylight-saving-time-presskit/
* (refs, with pro and con): https://srbr.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/DST-References-S...
European Sleep Research Society:
* https://esrs.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/To_the_EU_Commiss...
American Academy of Sleep Medicine (with 36 footnotes if you want to dig further):
* https://jcsm.aasm.org/doi/10.5664/jcsm.8780
* https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.8780
The Centre for Chronobiology, based at the Psychiatric University Hospital (University of Basel):
* http://www.chronobiology.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/JBR-D...
* http://www.chronobiology.ch/
That's only good for early birds, because you end up with it being light for hours before most people are awake (during the summer). If you keep DST in place permanently, sundown happens later, and you eliminate the need for an extra hour of lighting every evening, which presumably saves electricity.
It's easier to stay awake when it's getting dark than become awake if it's still dark in the morning
Yeah, but I'd 1000x rather commute to work when it's still dark than have it get dark before I get home.
If you get to work by car it's safer with Standard Time.
assuming you're talking about daylight, it depends on your latitude and where your longitude falls in your timezone. with the current system, I drive to work in the dark and I drive home in the dark at different times of the year. I think it's more or less even for me, but maybe there's an optimal timing that minimizes everyone's commuting in the dark time. not that I feel particularly unsafe driving in the dark anyway, I only care if the sun is at an angle where I can't block it with my visor. either way, this seems like a marginal concern.
When I used to commute semi-regularly, part of it was along a highway (to use the term generously) that I swear was laid in a way to maximize the solar glare in some locations. One of those places is where it intersects with an interstate and semi-regularly you'd see cars that had been in accidents or the remnants of same at the side of the road.
I live in a timezone that begins with hints of light appearing at worst somewhere between 4 and 5 am. A combination of location and our timezone shifted to match a neighboring country for ease of tourist made it this way.
I have lived where the sun doesn't appear early in the morning too and I greatly favor it. Living here the sun can set before 5 pm and during the longest days of the year I only see sunset at 730 pm. Yes, I can do more things after dark but I consider it so much worse since it makes me feel like the day is over so early and I only just finished work.
Then when you want to rest in the morning the heat and light creeps in 5 in the morning it also kills your energy for later in the day. So not sure if you are talking from experience living in a place like mine but I would prefer to return to longer evenings and quieter mornings.
I have lived where the sun doesn't appear early in the morning too and I greatly favor it. Living here the sun can set before 5 pm and during the longest days of the year I only see sunset at 730 pm. Yes, I can do more things after dark but I consider it so much worse since it makes me feel like the day is over so early and I only just finished work.
Then when you want to rest in the morning the heat and light creeps in 5 in the morning it also kills your energy for later in the day. So not sure if you are talking from experience living in a place like mine but I would prefer to return to longer evenings and quieter mornings.
[deleted]
Yeah, but none of us really get anything done at work before like 10am anyway no matter which time system we're in.
I have the opposite problem where I live. With DST the sun does not rise until 8 AM.
In fact, in January, the sun rises here at 7:40 AM Standard Time. Which would be 8:40 AM Daylight Time.
It would be terrible to have to wake up an hour before sunrise.
In fact, in January, the sun rises here at 7:40 AM Standard Time. Which would be 8:40 AM Daylight Time.
It would be terrible to have to wake up an hour before sunrise.
That's my preference too, but making DST permanent is better than continuing to change twice a year.
When confronted with three choices and none of the three have majority support, society usually chooses the "status quo" option. Even when a proper ranked choice vote would end up with one of the other two options.
So I guess I need to keep quiet to ensure that we end up with our second choice rather than our third choice.
When confronted with three choices and none of the three have majority support, society usually chooses the "status quo" option. Even when a proper ranked choice vote would end up with one of the other two options.
So I guess I need to keep quiet to ensure that we end up with our second choice rather than our third choice.
Let's split the difference: Spring ahead 1/2 an hour and then keep the clocks there.
So the big problem is springing ahead. No one likes it. On the other hand, everyone loves falling back.
I'd like to propose making the day approximately 9.86 seconds longer, so that each year we accumulate 1 hour of extra time. Then, each fall, we set the clocks back one hour.
You get the benefits of DST (more sunlight later in the day in the summer) without the jarring "spring ahead" each year.
I'd like to propose making the day approximately 9.86 seconds longer, so that each year we accumulate 1 hour of extra time. Then, each fall, we set the clocks back one hour.
You get the benefits of DST (more sunlight later in the day in the summer) without the jarring "spring ahead" each year.
It would be quite annoying to have your clock off a minute every week. The first couple weeks wouldn't be too big of an issue, but when you start getting 10 minutes off you would need to fix your clock.
Nah, it'd be "trivial" (in the way that generates employment for programmers, win-win) for your cell phone and computer to adjust automatically. You might be able to just get the NTP servers to make the adjustment daily and everyone else would just follow along without knowing it. Fancier wall clocks, too.
If you've got a fancy watch, just go get its movement adjusted to run 10 seconds slow. Full employment for watchmakers too, it's a shovel-ready proposal!
If you've got a fancy watch, just go get its movement adjusted to run 10 seconds slow. Full employment for watchmakers too, it's a shovel-ready proposal!
Believe it or not but some of us still have dumb watches and clocks. I have a dumb clock in my bedroom, on my oven, and below my tv. I don't want to buy a fancy clock. I just want the clock to tell me the time and I don't want it connecting to my network just to be accurate.
And depending on what sort of dumb clock your dumb clock is, it probably has a screw somewhere to make it run a little faster or slower, or something similar, to tune the clock to make it run at the right speed. You just give it a slight adjustment and presto-chango, it runs at the new speed.
For clocks that take their timing from the frequency of the electric current in the power lines, that's fixable too.
For clocks that take their timing from the frequency of the electric current in the power lines, that's fixable too.
It may be possible to change it, but its a hassle. I don't know if it is possible with something like an oven and wouldn't want to mess with something like that regardless. The solution to the time situation shouldn't be to be messing with electrical currents. That is just going to be a non-starter for so many people.
It's bad enough as it is in the northern latitudes where you wake up at about 5:15AM in June because the sun is already pretty bright. Keeping it on standard time would mean waking up at 4:15AM. Also, it's nice having more daylight after work.
I have the opposite problem where I live. With DST the sun does not rise until 8 AM.
In fact, in January, the sun rises here at 7:40 AM Standard Time. Which would be 8:40 AM Daylight Time.
It would be terrible to have to wake up an hour before sunrise.
In fact, in January, the sun rises here at 7:40 AM Standard Time. Which would be 8:40 AM Daylight Time.
It would be terrible to have to wake up an hour before sunrise.
That way noon has the sun at zenith, which makes sense.
A lot depends on where you live. In Boston which is fairly northernly by US standards and very far east in a time zone, for example, staying on Eastern Standard Time year round would mean it's sunrise at about 4AM on the summer solstice and it gets dark at 8:30pm rather than 9:30pm like today.
Now, these days, I have a lot of schedule flexibility and at least for activities I'm doing on my own I could just get up earlier in the summer. I'll be a bit out of sync with business schedules but I could largely do it.
Now, these days, I have a lot of schedule flexibility and at least for activities I'm doing on my own I could just get up earlier in the summer. I'll be a bit out of sync with business schedules but I could largely do it.
[deleted]
States can already make standard time permanent if they want to. Obviously, not many do.
This change just allows states to make DST permanent.
This change just allows states to make DST permanent.
No. Standard time is the worst one.
North of about 45 degrees latitude, the winter time change centers daylight perfectly so that for part of the year students leave home in the dark, go home in the dark, and sit in class through all of the daylight. When the days finally start getting long enough to see a little sunlight at each end, it's time to move the clocks forward and they're back to going to school in the dark. It's brutal.
Way back when I was in school there were a couple that had 10 hour days, to better accomodate parent's schedules. Drop junior off when it fits your morning schedule best, same for pickup in the afternoon. Teachers worked on the early end, late end, took a long lunch, worked four 10 hour days, whatever suited the needs of their students and their own lives. The pickup and dropoff zones didn't get gridlocked with every single parent showing up at the same exact time. My point is, there are far better options available than fooling around with time itself.
Way back when I was in school there were a couple that had 10 hour days, to better accomodate parent's schedules. Drop junior off when it fits your morning schedule best, same for pickup in the afternoon. Teachers worked on the early end, late end, took a long lunch, worked four 10 hour days, whatever suited the needs of their students and their own lives. The pickup and dropoff zones didn't get gridlocked with every single parent showing up at the same exact time. My point is, there are far better options available than fooling around with time itself.
In my area this was actually a logistical thing. Other schools in the area bussed children at different hours.
I don't think people are considering this reality in this debate.
I am not advocating for anything.
I don't think people are considering this reality in this debate.
I am not advocating for anything.
> Other schools in the area bussed children at different hours.
Do you mean other schools in your school district or schools in other districts?
Do you mean other schools in your school district or schools in other districts?
other schools in my school district.
it was just a crowded and large area. a single high school even put 9th graders in a totally different building and location. It was basically middle middle school. All the levels of school had different start and end times to accommodate, and there were many schools at each level with overlapping bussing.
it was just a crowded and large area. a single high school even put 9th graders in a totally different building and location. It was basically middle middle school. All the levels of school had different start and end times to accommodate, and there were many schools at each level with overlapping bussing.
Any changes made would be district wide.
We probably got here (counterproductive start times) by making budgets the first consideration - with literally everything else following it. It also explains why we segment kids by age.
We probably got here (counterproductive start times) by making budgets the first consideration - with literally everything else following it. It also explains why we segment kids by age.
Adding more buss drivers is relatively cheap. Bussing is ~3% of the total cost of primary school.
I don't know if this is still happening, but there have definitely been issues with bus driver shortages. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-28/there-s-a...
[deleted]
"hey, so I know the county board is cutting the maxed out education budget by 20% but hear me out, lets not do that and increase it by 3% permanently. I yield my time."
One bus can’t be in two places at once, no matter how many drivers you have.
That 3% already includes busses, maintenance, fuel etc.
Amortized. If you wanted to double the bus fleet at once, that would be a heck of a budgetary challenge.
The physical buss represents ~1 year worth of the cost of bussing students up front. Financing that isn’t a major issue for most local governments.
Again assuming there is some net benefit to the economy to offset this cost.
Again assuming there is some net benefit to the economy to offset this cost.
> Opponents of the bill say DST makes it hard on school children and parents who have to wait at the bus stop in dark hours of the morning.
Probably easier to just give them all flashlights, than to have everyone shift their clocks to accommodate this use case.
Probably easier to just give them all flashlights, than to have everyone shift their clocks to accommodate this use case.
How about standard time instead of DST especially in winter
Or here’s an idea: we can do DST in the summer, and standard time in the winter. Best of both worlds!
The problem is the switch, so it's better to get rid of it and then Standard Time is the better choice
This argument makes less and less sense with each passing year. I'm old enough to remember when we had to change all the clocks by hand, and some people had no idea how to change the clocks in microwaves and VCRs or their car, so it'd be off by an hour for half the year. Somehow we managed fine.
These days all clocks change automatically, and there are standard and constantly improving datetime libraries to help applications manage these human factors in a standard way. Your morning alarm is automatically updated, you calendar events automatically reflect the timezone they are defined in.
The only curveball is when when the government arbitrarily changes the rules, like then did not too long ago in extending DST. And which DST advocates are advocating for doing _again_.
These days all clocks change automatically, and there are standard and constantly improving datetime libraries to help applications manage these human factors in a standard way. Your morning alarm is automatically updated, you calendar events automatically reflect the timezone they are defined in.
The only curveball is when when the government arbitrarily changes the rules, like then did not too long ago in extending DST. And which DST advocates are advocating for doing _again_.
It is not about the process of changing the clock, but about the fact that the body should be able to perform one hour earlier from one day to the next.
Especially when changing from standard time to DST, this is stressful for the body.
https://www.businessinsider.com/daylight-saving-time-is-dead...
The transition is over the weekend, so really one ought to be able to adjust 20min a day--again, something which could be automated.
But honestly I believe this reporting is overblown. The body is able to adjust rather quickly to such a small difference in time, as many of us who (used to) travel quite frequently know.
But honestly I believe this reporting is overblown. The body is able to adjust rather quickly to such a small difference in time, as many of us who (used to) travel quite frequently know.
Depends on how early your day starts.
If you normally start at 05:00 o'clock standard time then to get up at 04:00 o'clock standard time is pretty stressful.
I don’t think it ultimately matters. Shifting the schedule forward or backwards doesn’t change the fact that the students will only have so many hours in the day. The only way to give more time to students is to cut school shorter. That’s to say nothing for the students who would feel compelled to immediately fill that time with another extra-curricular.
IMHO what would help is colleges putting a stop to the resume-padding they implicitly encourage students to do to gain an edge on their peers for acceptance.
IMHO what would help is colleges putting a stop to the resume-padding they implicitly encourage students to do to gain an edge on their peers for acceptance.
When elite colleges get 15-20 applicants for every student they admit, how would you propose they implement this? Roll a d20, score a critical hit, get into Harvard?
Yes, that's EXACTLY how it should work. Lottery
Prediction if Harvard did that: Within two years, Harvard gets 100+ applicants for every spot. 10 years later: Harvard is no longer considered elite (or Harvard after Class of 2030 is no longer considered elite).
That outcome might be aligned with your goals; it's probably not aligned with Harvard's goals nor that of their alumni.
That outcome might be aligned with your goals; it's probably not aligned with Harvard's goals nor that of their alumni.
What does elite mean anymore? What makes Harvard elite?
What makes Harvard elite is the demand for the grads, under the belief that they are, on average, somehow stronger employees than graduates from a random “University of State”.
There’s data to suggest that applying to Harvard is a stronger predictor of lifetime outcomes than the incremental prediction provided by graduating is. So, much of the benefit is provided before campus, but that doesn’t mean that 5x as many people would get the benefit if only they’d be convinced to fill out that application by virtue of admissions being driven by rolling dice.
https://time.com/54342/it-doesnt-matter-where-you-go-to-coll...
There’s data to suggest that applying to Harvard is a stronger predictor of lifetime outcomes than the incremental prediction provided by graduating is. So, much of the benefit is provided before campus, but that doesn’t mean that 5x as many people would get the benefit if only they’d be convinced to fill out that application by virtue of admissions being driven by rolling dice.
https://time.com/54342/it-doesnt-matter-where-you-go-to-coll...
Just cap the criteria they consider for entry and lottery the qualifying applicants on in.
That’s basically how it works now anyway.
That’s basically how it works now anyway.
> Here's an idea - let students (and parents) sleep for an additional hour rather than make them wake up before the crack of dawn for no reason.
When exactly is the "crack of dawn"? Unless you live near the equator the "crack of dawn" changes every day. If "additional hour" is relative to the clock then you can always start things an hour late relative to the clock, regardless of where the clock is relative to daylight hours.
When exactly is the "crack of dawn"? Unless you live near the equator the "crack of dawn" changes every day. If "additional hour" is relative to the clock then you can always start things an hour late relative to the clock, regardless of where the clock is relative to daylight hours.
> let students (and parents) sleep for an additional hour
To complete the sensible set, elementary schools open first, high schools last.
In brutal southern climates, end the school year on Halloween when kids can play outside w/o heat stroke - with kids inside air conditioning during worthless summer months.
To complete the sensible set, elementary schools open first, high schools last.
In brutal southern climates, end the school year on Halloween when kids can play outside w/o heat stroke - with kids inside air conditioning during worthless summer months.
Some places have year round schooling.
It's not for "no reason" - Public education's primary purpose in the United States, other than indoctrination, is daycare for the workforce.
So school must start early enough parents can get children to school before heading to their jobs.
So school must start early enough parents can get children to school before heading to their jobs.
Before school programs exist. Daycare exists. School does not need to start early enough for parents to get children off to school first. Folks working retail, in factories, and in health care deal with this all the time.
> makes it hard on school children and parents who have to wait at the bus stop in dark hours of the morning
I can't even understand what is 'hard' about it?
I can't even understand what is 'hard' about it?
It's a bizarre "con": Pros: better health, less accidents fewer deaths during the switch, etc. Cons: it's "hard" on some kids and parents to wait for the bus in the dark which they already do anyway, just now it's for a few more weeks.
Seems a no brainer.
Seems a no brainer.
Con: more accidents in winter time because it's harder to become awake if it's still dark than stay awake if ut becomes dark.
More accidents of children if they have to walk to school or the bus.
The pros refer only to the elimination of the switch but not to the permanent implementation of the DST.
Standard Time would be the better choice.
Montgomery County, Maryland, is quite prosperous, but wishes its school buses to make more than two runs per day. So the high school students are out at the curb early in the morning, since nobody wants the elementary school students out in half-light. The high school students--who would prefer to sleep in--are groggy from lack of sleep, the elementary school students--who wake early--have an extra hour at home to do nothing in particular. I don't know what the story is with the middle school kids.
I commuted to college long ago one winter with DST. I did not enjoy it. I'm not sure I'd have enjoyed it even living on campus.
I commuted to college long ago one winter with DST. I did not enjoy it. I'm not sure I'd have enjoyed it even living on campus.
> since nobody wants the elementary school students out in half-light
Lol why? What do they think happens at half-light?
Lol why? What do they think happens at half-light?
Adding adequate street lighting near bus stops really isn't that hard.
Yep.
Or just close the schools permanently, sell the assets, commit to at-home learning or micro-schools.
Or just close the schools permanently, sell the assets, commit to at-home learning or micro-schools.
Anyone interested in this topic may enjoy this book:
Spring Forward: The Annual Madness of Daylight Saving Time
https://smile.amazon.com/dp/1582434956
Alas, there is no Kindle edition nor a "look inside" preview, but I found the book very interesting.
Spring Forward: The Annual Madness of Daylight Saving Time
https://smile.amazon.com/dp/1582434956
Alas, there is no Kindle edition nor a "look inside" preview, but I found the book very interesting.
Like they've done (or Congress has done) every year for the past decade or so, only for it to die in-situ.
Here is the link to the actual bill. I have it bookmarked
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/69?s...
Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don't stand in the doorway
Don't block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
The battle outside ragin'
Will soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'
Hehe
Hehe
As a night owl, I prefer DST. But PST would work too. Just please get rid of the time change.
Has anyone considered how many IT systems are going to need to be updated to account for this change? This is a little Y2k IT bubble waiting to happen.
If this is proactively folded into overhauling systems for the 2038 problem I could stomach it
If this is proactively folded into overhauling systems for the 2038 problem I could stomach it
This happened in 2005 when the federal government changed the start & end dates of DST. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Policy_Act_of_2005#Chan...
Time zone updates happen all the time. The latest version was released in January: https://www.iana.org/time-zones
This happens all the time. Governments regularly change DST start dates with little to no warning.
If you think this is a problem, you don't deal with dates.
If you think this is a problem, you don't deal with dates.
Did anyone consider pros and cons of shifting just by 10 minutes every month? 60 minutes per 6 months divides so nicely (and maybe unleashes hell to time duration calculations, but who cares). Edit: same for timezones.
Pros:
- No increase in heart attacks
- Nice fluid shift from month to month
- Minor errors less important
Cons:
- Rewriting of timezone code takes 8 years, claims over 800 lives as every programmer either quits or commits suicide after working on project for a few weeks
- The staggeringly difficult to detect under low load timestamping errors cause constant stress for distributed systems engineers, making the job among the most deadly in the world.
- Nice fluid shift from month to month
- Minor errors less important
Cons:
- Rewriting of timezone code takes 8 years, claims over 800 lives as every programmer either quits or commits suicide after working on project for a few weeks
- The staggeringly difficult to detect under low load timestamping errors cause constant stress for distributed systems engineers, making the job among the most deadly in the world.
Re cons, we already have tzdata with all irregularities like DSTs and leap seconds built in. I believe that it wouldn’t be so hard for libraries who already use tzdata. And those who don’t, they couldn’t handle time intervals properly anyway.
Let's take it one step farther, and have each second be 99.999% of a second from December 20 and June 20, and be 100.001% of a second from June 20 to December 20. Problem solved!
[deleted]
Imagine having to adjust every clock in your house every single month.
Just move to the standrad time of the next timezone. Why make it so complicated by using this bastardized "Permanent DST"?
If your timezone is officially UTC-5+1 all year long, you might as well simplify to UTC-4...
If your timezone is officially UTC-5+1 all year long, you might as well simplify to UTC-4...
Such priorities for these politicians. While people are sick and dying they merely... adjust their watches.
But that's not enough so they legislate it for the rest of us too. Such priorities.
But that's not enough so they legislate it for the rest of us too. Such priorities.
Gear everybody up to split the difference and at one point, push the time either 30 minutes forward or back, and be done with it, forever. Give everyone... 18 months to prepare.
This switching is finally over in France (and in the EU, each country had a choice).
One last switch in March to summer time and we are done!
I am fortunate to leave on the western edge of the timezone though.
One last switch in March to summer time and we are done!
I am fortunate to leave on the western edge of the timezone though.
The abolition of DST in Europe has not yet been confirmed - it seems to be stalled in the Council
https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/summertime_en
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summer_time_in_Europe
https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/summertime_en
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summer_time_in_Europe
Ah crap, you are right. I was not aware that COVID stopped the DST decision, thanks.
I was actually quite admiration of the EU to have made a decision, something they never do. But the the reality of this deeply dysfunctional institution hit again.
To be clear, I am all for the EU as a concept, it is just that one can hardly expect the bureaucratic dinosaur that rules it to make swift decisions. Not to mention that the anti-EU parties that are not elected in the member countries, do get elected to the EU parliament. This is a heap of nonsense.
I was actually quite admiration of the EU to have made a decision, something they never do. But the the reality of this deeply dysfunctional institution hit again.
To be clear, I am all for the EU as a concept, it is just that one can hardly expect the bureaucratic dinosaur that rules it to make swift decisions. Not to mention that the anti-EU parties that are not elected in the member countries, do get elected to the EU parliament. This is a heap of nonsense.
anyone who works with people in other countries will appreciate this, recurring meetings are always an issue with various countries going in an out of daylight savings.
after fixing this, I'd like to see the entire country move to a single timezone. that would be a vast improvement as well.
after fixing this, I'd like to see the entire country move to a single timezone. that would be a vast improvement as well.
Dropping the switch itself is a good idea. But to which one to stick to is more moot.
In Hawai'i time only goes in one direction and it makes life easier.
So the morning people may win yet another round, after having so many advantages already.
Of course they cannot go to work at 7 instead of 8. No, everyone has to jump and tamper with the natural time.
Of course they cannot go to work at 7 instead of 8. No, everyone has to jump and tamper with the natural time.
Are you arguing for adjusting clocks by an hour twice a year as natural time?
No, I'm for keeping the natural time that is called "winter time" these days all year long.
People who want their DST in the summer should just get up one hour earlier; laws would need to be made that jobs have to accommodate that choice.
I think most jobs are that flexible these days.
People who want their DST in the summer should just get up one hour earlier; laws would need to be made that jobs have to accommodate that choice.
I think most jobs are that flexible these days.
I don't care much if a state chooses daylight or standard time, I don't want to change zones twice a year.
What are you talking about. Everyone praises a guy who stays late basically regardless of when he came in. No one praises dude that comes in soon.
Just abolish time altogether
Yes, please.
> Opponents of the bill say DST makes it hard on school children and parents who have to wait at the bus stop in dark hours of the morning.
We should also push back school start times at least 1 hour. Studies have shown kids benefit from this, mostly as a result of getting more sleep.
School starting times have historically been pegged to the time most parents begin their work commute. Since many parents no longer have a commute, it makes even more sense to push back starting times.
We should also push back school start times at least 1 hour. Studies have shown kids benefit from this, mostly as a result of getting more sleep.
School starting times have historically been pegged to the time most parents begin their work commute. Since many parents no longer have a commute, it makes even more sense to push back starting times.
Push back school, and you have to push back work (no, not everyone can work from home). And then you have to push back entertainment. And then everything else. And then you've changed the clocks, but in a worse, more complicated way.
Not everyone can work from home, but tons and tons of people can't work 9 to 5 either. We can instead start agreeing that the current system is pretty broken.
When I was in elementary school, my parents had to start work much earlier than school started (at some point my mother was a school bus driver. Kinds of rule that out no matter how much you shift the school day!). So I was just waiting alone for the bus for a few hours. It was boring as hell, not gonna lie.
When I was in elementary school, my parents had to start work much earlier than school started (at some point my mother was a school bus driver. Kinds of rule that out no matter how much you shift the school day!). So I was just waiting alone for the bus for a few hours. It was boring as hell, not gonna lie.
We should push back work, but still end at the same time. We've been programmed to accept 9-5 salaried jobs (which is actually 8-5 or 9-6 for most people not including commute) but on a macro level it's been proven employees are receiving less and less of the pie. Fuck them, let's work less and enjoy more of life with ppl you care about.
> "Sunshine Protection Act"
Gag me with a token ring card. I hate these bill names, if for no other reason than it introduces severe bias in voting. Anybody voting against this now hates sunshine, freedom, etc.
That said, I'm eager for this to pass so I never have to deal with a time change again.
Gag me with a token ring card. I hate these bill names, if for no other reason than it introduces severe bias in voting. Anybody voting against this now hates sunshine, freedom, etc.
That said, I'm eager for this to pass so I never have to deal with a time change again.
They should just name bills like they name cloud servers. Vote yes on mystical-quagmire-cheesepuff!
I’d vote for anything named mystical-quagmire-cheesepuff.
You joke but this is a great idea.
No it’s absolutely not a great idea.
Beats calling a certain law the “patriot” act when it’s anything but.
You must not like awkward, magical balls of fermented milk.
Reminds me of the story from Australia about the former Queensland Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen's arguments that the curtains will fade due to the extra hour of sunlight:
https://www.smh.com.au/national/academic-battles-for-qld-day...
https://www.smh.com.au/national/academic-battles-for-qld-day...
Deep down, he did realize that changing the clocks doesn’t change the amount of daylight..right?
You never new with Joh - he also backed a "hydrogen car" with doubtful claims [1 - pdf], the government ended with a number of criminal charges for ministers and Joh himself.
[1] https://www.skeptics.com.au/wp-content/uploads/magazine/The%...
[1] https://www.skeptics.com.au/wp-content/uploads/magazine/The%...
But it would change the times people have their curtains closed.
(Not that I think it's a particularly good argument. And no, I'm not in the pocket of Big Curtain)
(Not that I think it's a particularly good argument. And no, I'm not in the pocket of Big Curtain)
Like ISA or SFP? Two totally different levels of effort.
PS I hate sunshine.
PS I hate sunshine.
> PS I hate sunshine
Likewise. The only good weather is whatever obscures the giant, glowy, migraine-inducing, cancer ball in the sky.
Likewise. The only good weather is whatever obscures the giant, glowy, migraine-inducing, cancer ball in the sky.
Hold the vampire, bring garlic !
I agree, but branding for bills is an important part. For example, "The Patriot Act" sounds better than "Spying on Citizens Act"
I don't even particularly care if we standardize on DST or non-DST. Just... pick one. The constant clock changing is silly.
I can't help but notice the "Sunshine Protection Act" was sponsored by a senator (Marco Rubio) from Florida, the official nickname of which is "the Sunshine State."
I suspect the bill's name was purposely chosen to subtly suggest it protects Florida during the next election cycle.
I suspect the bill's name was purposely chosen to subtly suggest it protects Florida during the next election cycle.
Either Marco Rubio is playing some kind of 10d chess in the hopes of subconsciously suggesting to all 8 people that will actually look at his policy record that he is protecting Florida, or the bill is intended to make daylight savings time permanent. To tell you the truth, I favor the latter interpretation.
I suppose you could argue over whether ST or DST is "better" for Florida; you could probably make the argument either way. But certainly in the states in the southern US, it likely makes more sense to pick a time zone and stick with it.
I totally agree
rather silly i feel, why not spend money on researching slowing the earths rotation! or maybe just wake up later all year round. Or - abandon GMT and pick a spot like Paris, maybe you can call it the new "Euro time" - that way Britain can happily ignore it and stay with GMT.
This would be great. Could we go so far as to have the entire whole world operate on UTC, so we could have an Earth Time?
Sounds great in theory, but it becomes too hard to know what times are "early" and "late" for people. When telling people what time it is, you'd also have to include where you are so they know what's early/late, and at that point you've just reinvented timezones.
For the billions of people with smart phones, wouldn't this be very easily solved with a default app?
Like it is now? Sure. So then what benefit are you looking for in changing everyone to UTC?
Abolishing time zones has a lot of problems.
https://qntm.org/abolish
https://qntm.org/abolish
Yeah, of course there are trade offs, and that's not a balanced run down of them. Most of the issues raised there seem easily addressed in the modern world.
agreed! based on the amount of "time" i've wasted converting timezones in code, i tell everyone that'd listen we should just teach kids to memorize unix timestamps and these problems would all go away
Assume that your average adult works 9-5, and your average school child is in school 8-3. Broad strokes, these are the two groups to focus on. I know most adults commute earlier than 9, and most students are up earlier than 8, but it's safe to say that most Americans are up-and-at-'em from 8-5.
On the shortest day of the year in Boston, sunrise is at 7:10am and sunset is at 4:14PM. Including civil twilight ("it's still kind of daytime") extends it to 6:38am to 4:46PM.
Even on the shortest day of the year, if you wake up even before 7 you're waking up in daylight. But, sunset is super early. Every working adult is commuting home in actual nighttime.
Shift that forward 1 hour, and it gets light at 7:30AM and gets dark at 5:45PM. While slightly darker for students in the morning, it's immensely better for working adults, who at least get some daylight in the evenings, and not actual nighttime before 5PM.